Variability, Noise and Predictability in Motor Response Times: Adaptation or Misadaptation?

Poitou, Tymothée; Pouget, Pierre

doi:10.5772/28166

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 102 publications

(91 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an IAT, the aim of the task is to categorise the stimuli as quickly (and as accurately) as possible, and these reaction times form the key experimental data. Speeded responding is highly vulnerable to random error variance, due to natural variability in motor response execution, lapses in attentional focus, or differences in participant processing speed and attentional capacity (Han, Czellar, Olson, & Fazio, 2009;Poitou & Pouget, 2012). As such, speeded responding has the potential to introduce substantial non-trait or random error variance, resulting in volatile, unstable and variable results (Fiedler, Messner, & Bluemke, 2006;Lane et al, 2007).…”

Section: Potential Sources Of Random Error Variance For Iatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

More Error than Attitude in Implicit Association Tests (IATs), a CFA-MTMM analysis of measurement error.

Chequer¹,

Mg²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many design characteristics of the popular Implicit Association Test (IAT) appear to make the task highly susceptible to measurement error. This study examined potential sources of measurement error for two types of IAT, the classic verbal IAT (VIAT) and a fully pictorial IAT (PIAT). A CFA-MTMM analytical approach was used to estimate the influence of both random error and method variance on the IAT scores. Four empirical IATs were employed to assess implicit bias towards Middle Eastern and European people (‘Racial’ VIAT and PIAT) and countries (‘Country’ VIAT and PIAT). They were completed by 198 student participants from an Australian University. The CFA-MTMM analysis provided clear evidence of measurement error confounding IAT scores. Specifically, IAT data was shown to be, on average, comprised of just over 50% random error variance, nearly 30% method variance and under 20% trait variance. These results demonstrate unequivocally that IAT scores are predominantly composed of measurement error not implicit attitudes. These findings have significant implications for the use of IATs in applied research. Options for minimising the impact of high error variance in future implicit attitudinal research are considered.

show abstract

Section: Potential Sources Of Random Error Variance For Iatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

More Error than Attitude in Implicit Association Tests (IATs), a CFA-MTMM analysis of measurement error.

Chequer¹,

Mg²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whilst the magnitude of this error component may be surprising, the presence of significant error in IAT data should certainly be expected for two key reasons. Firstly, both forms of the IAT rely on speeded responding, a format known to result in greater non-trait variance than non-timed assessment (Poitou & Pouget, 2012).…”

Section: High Measurement Error In Implicit Attitudinal Measurement: Implications and Future Directions For Implicit Attitudinal Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct Validation of the Pictorial Implicit Association Test (PIAT): Implications for implicit attitudinal research

Chequer¹,

Mg²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Construct validation of the Pictorial Implicit Association Test (PIAT) was assessed using Confirmatory Factor Analytic (CFA) procedures to account for measurement error. The PIAT was compared with the traditional verbal IAT (VIAT) to examine construct validity and internal consistency. Attitudes towards Middle Eastern and European people and countries were examined using two PIATs, two VIATs and two explicit attitude questionnaires for 198 student participants. Results demonstrated convergent validity of the PIATs and VIATs, supporting the equivalency of these task formats. The PIAT appears a suitable alternative to the VIAT for use in applied behavioural research, especially with populations for whom the VIAT is inappropriate, such as young children and the illiterate. However, evidence of substantial error variance in both the PIAT and the more widely used VIAT was concerning, and suggests the need for latent modelling analytical approaches to address error variance in implicit attitudinal research.

show abstract

Variability, Noise and Predictability in Motor Response Times: Adaptation or Misadaptation?

Cited by 2 publications

References 102 publications

More Error than Attitude in Implicit Association Tests (IATs), a CFA-MTMM analysis of measurement error.

More Error than Attitude in Implicit Association Tests (IATs), a CFA-MTMM analysis of measurement error.

Construct Validation of the Pictorial Implicit Association Test (PIAT): Implications for implicit attitudinal research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About