Minimizing Method-Specific Variance in the IAT

Abstract

The present paper introduces a new variant of the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998 ) called the Single Block IAT (SB-IAT). By eliminating the IAT’s block structure, the SB-IAT is argued to solve the structural problem of recoding in the IAT and accordingly, its contamination by method-specific variance. In Study 1, a flower-insect SB-IAT, a task-switching ability SB-IAT, and a geometry SB-IAT showed reduced, but still significant effects. Zero correlations between the three SB-IATs indicated a substantially reduced amount of method-specific variance. Study 2 examined the SB-IAT’s psychometric properties. A political attitude SB-IAT showed acceptable reliability, discriminated between liberal and conservative voters, and correlated with the corresponding attitude rating in the same magnitude as the standard IAT. Results indicate that the SB-IAT minimizes method-specific variance while retaining the IAT’s satisfying psychometric properties. The discussion focuses on potentials and constraints of this newly developed measure.

On the controllability of evaluative-priming effects: Some limits that are none

“…Also, substantial implicitÁimplicit correlations can be expected. Finally, this domain has often been used to validate indirect measures (e.g., Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005; Teige-Mocigemba, Klauer, & Rothermund, 2008). Specifically, as fake prime categories, we selected ''Alliance 90/ The Greens'' (referred to as the Greens in the following) and the ''Christian Democratic Union'' (referred to as CDU in the following).…”

Holding on to our functional roots when exploring new intellectual islands: A voyage through implicit cognition research

“…7 The discovery of method related variance on IAT effects has led to the emergence of a second generation of IAT alternatives that aim to circumvent the block structure of the task and its relativistic nature. Examples include the Single Block IAT (Teige-Mocigemba, Klauer, & Rothermund, 2008), Recoding Free IAT (Rothermund et al, 2009) and the Sorting Paired Features Task (Bar-Anan, Nosek, & Vianello, 2009). Equally, a number of strategies have also been devised to reduce method variance on sematic and evaluative priming tasks (see Wentura & Degner, 2010).…”

Assessment of Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition

“…Several studies have shown that task-switching costs (greater costs, i.e., slower responses, in tasks pairing categories that are not well associated) represent an important component of the IAT effect (Mierke & Klauer, 2001, 2003. Additionally, individual differences in task-switching ability were shown to represent a small portion of method-specific IAT variance that was independent of the associations being measured (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2005; Teige-Mocigemba, Klauer, Rothermund, 2008).…”