Consequential validity of the Implicit Association Test: Comment on Blanton and Jaccard (2006).

Greenwald, Anthony G.; Nosek, Brian A.; Narayanan, Sriram

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.61.1.56

Cited by 109 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Blanton and Jaccard (2006) have argued that the location of the IAT's zero point has not yet been firmly established, and so the meaning of absolute IAT scores is uncertain. On the other hand, Greenwald et al, (2006) provided evidence that the observed zero point corresponds to the true zero point in one context (preference for one presidential candidate over another). Accordingly, consistent with the literature (e.g., de Swanson et al, 2001), we interpret the negative IAT effect as reflecting a negative implicit attitude, with the caveat that future research should 1) identify the zero point in the current context (smoking), and 2) link absolute IAT scores to meaningful real world events, such as outcomes in smoking cessation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit attitudes to smoking are associated with craving and dependence

Waters

Carter

Robinson

et al. 2007

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) has been used to assess automatic affective responses to drug cues. Smokers (N = 57) completed the IAT at four experimental sessions. They abstained from smoking before two of the sessions (AB), and smoked normally before the other two sessions (NON). At one AB (and NON) session, they smoked a cigarette about 40 minutes before completing the IAT (S), and at the other they did not smoke (NS). Overall, participants exhibited a negative IAT effect, indicating that they found the classification task easier when smoking was paired with bad than when smoking was paired with good. Using repeated measures ANOVA, the IAT effect was made less negative by pre-session Abstinence, and made more negative by Smoking. It was most negative in the NON-S condition. Using Generalized Estimating Equations analyses, the IAT effect was positively associated with pre-task craving ratings assessed on the Questionnaire of Smoking Urges-Brief, but was not associated with a physiological measure of automatic affective responses (startles while viewing smoking vs. neutral pictures). The IAT effect was associated with scores on the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence. In sum, automatic affective responses assessed with the smoking IAT are associated with measures of smoking motivation and dependence.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit attitudes to smoking are associated with craving and dependence

Waters

Carter

Robinson

et al. 2007

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The IAT is a reliable and valid measure of implicit attitudes (Greenwald et al 2006;Nosek et al 2005) and has been used with children (Baron and Banaji 2006). The IAT is a double discrimination task in which participants are asked to assign single stimuli as fast as possible to a given pair of target categories and attribute categories using two response keys.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explicit- and Implicit Bullying Attitudes in Relation to Bullying Behavior

Goethem

Scholte

Wiers

2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of this study was to examine whether an assessment of implicit bullying attitudes could add to the prediction of bullying behavior after controlling for explicit bullying attitudes. Primary school children (112 boys and 125 girls, M age=11 years, 5 months) completed two newly developed measures of implicit bullying attitudes (a general Implicit Association Test on bullying and a movie-primed specific IAT on bullying), an explicit bullying attitude measure, and self reported, peer reported, and teacher rated bullying behavior. While explicit bullying attitudes predicted bullying behavior, implicit attitudes did not. However, a significant interaction between implicit and explicit bullying attitudes indicated that in children with relatively positive explicit attitudes, implicit bullying attitudes were important predictors of bullying behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.Keywords Explicit bullying attitudes . Implicit bullying attitudes . Interaction explicit and implicit bullying attitudes . Bullying School bullying is a large societal problem and is already evident among primary school children. Studies on this population show that 3-27% of the children bully, and 9-32% are bullied once a week or more (Berger 2007). Bullying has also been shown to have large negative consequences for the well-being of victims and bullies (Berger 2007;Scholte et al. 2007), which stresses the importance of targeting bullying behavior together with the factors that are related to bullying.Various factors have been found to contribute to the extent to which children bully other children. Research evidence indicates that social factors such as group membership and peer pressure, as well as individual, personal factors such as physical strength, aggressiveness, and empathy influence bullying (Rigby 2004). Another often studied individual factor is children's attitudes towards bullying. Attitudes are predictors of all kinds of spontaneous and deliberate social and non-social behavior (e.g., Glasman and Albarracin 2006) including bullying behavior (Salmivalli and Voeten 2004). Attitudes can be defined as general and enduring, concrete or abstract evaluations of a person, group, or issue and can be based on beliefs, emotions and behavior (cf. Petty and Cacioppo 1986).In attitude research, a distinction is made between implicit attitudes and explicit attitudes. Implicit attitudes are impulsive, spontaneous, uncontrolled emotional reactions and evaluations. In contrast, explicit attitudes refer to deliberate, reflective, controlled, consciously self-reported evaluations (Gawronski and Bodenhausen 2006). Dualprocess models assume that there are two different modes of information processing that underlie implicit and explicit attitudes. According to these models more automatic, impulsive, associative processes underlie implicit attitudes and more controlled, reflective processes underlie explicit During the research project on implicit and explicit bullying attitudes all authors were working at ...

show abstract

“…For instance, even if racial attitudes are a direct cause of scores on a racial IAT, it is not certain that a zero score on the racial IAT means that the person likes Black and White individuals to the same extent. Because of this fact, the IAT effect shown by a particular individual can be interpreted only by comparing it with the IAT effects of other persons (e.g., Person A has more positive attitudes toward White persons or less positive attitudes toward Black persons than does Person B; but see Greenwald, Nosek, & Sriram, 2006, for a critique of Blanton & Jaccard, 2006).…”

Section: Iat Effects the What Criterion: What Attributes Cause Variatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review.

Houwer¹,

Teige‐Mocigemba

Spruyt³

et al. 2009

Psychological Bulletin

724

657

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit measures can be defined as outcomes of measurement procedures that are caused in an automatic manner by psychological attributes. To establish that a measurement outcome is an implicit measure, one should examine (a) whether the outcome is causally produced by the psychological attribute it was designed to measure, (b) the nature of the processes by which the attribute causes the outcome, and (c) whether these processes operate automatically. This normative analysis provides a heuristic framework for organizing past and future research on implicit measures. The authors illustrate the heuristic function of their framework by using it to review past research on the 2 implicit measures that are currently most popular: effects in implicit association tests and affective priming tasks.Keywords: implicit measures, automaticity, IAT, affective priming Most psychologists would argue that a full understanding of the behavior of an individual requires knowledge not only of the external situation in which the individual is present but also of the internal psychological attributes of the individual. Throughout the history of psychology, researchers have therefore attempted to measure interindividual differences in the psychological attributes of people (e.g., Anastasi, 1958;Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985;Mischel & Shoda, 1995). During the past decade, a major development in this research has been the introduction of so-called implicit measures. These measures were originally put forward mainly within the social psychology literature (e.g., Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) but have since then spread to various other subdisciplines of psychology, including differential psychology (e.g., Asendorpf, Banse, & Mücke, 2002), clinical psychology (e.g., Gemar, Segal, Sagrati, & Kennedy, 2001, consumer psychology (e.g., Maison, Greenwald, & Bruin, 2004), and health psychology (e.g., Wiers, van Woerden, Smulders, & de Jong, 2002).Despite the widespread use of implicit measures, the actual meaning of the term implicit measure is rarely defined. On the basis of the work of Borsboom (Borsboom, 2006;Borsboom, Mellenbergh, & van Heerden, 2004) and De Houwer (De Houwer, 2006;, we first provide a normative analysis of the concept "implicit measure." The analysis is normative in the sense that it stipulates the properties that an ideal implicit measure should have. As such, the analysis provides a heuristic framework for reviewing and evaluating existing research on implicit measures. By examining the extent to which a particular implicit measure exhibits these normative properties, one can clarify the way in which the measure is an implicit measure and highlight those issues on which further research is required. In the second part of this article, we perform this exercise with regard to the two types of implicit measures that are currently most popular: effects in implicit association tests (IATs;Greenwald et al., 1998) and affective priming tasks (Fazio et al., 1995). Before we present and ap...

show abstract

Consequential validity of the Implicit Association Test: Comment on Blanton and Jaccard (2006).

Cited by 109 publications

References 27 publications

Implicit attitudes to smoking are associated with craving and dependence

Implicit attitudes to smoking are associated with craving and dependence

Explicit- and Implicit Bullying Attitudes in Relation to Bullying Behavior

Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About