Understanding and using the implicit association test: V. measuring semantic aspects of trait self‐concepts

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 695-706 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konrad Schnabel ◽  
Jens B. Asendorpf ◽  
Anthony G. Greenwald
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Latent Factors ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures ◽  
Negative Attributes ◽  
Semantic Aspect

Implicit Association Tests (IATs) often reveal strong associations of self with positive rather than negative attributes. This poses a problem in using the IAT to measure associations involving traits with either positive or negative evaluative content. In two studies, we employed non‐bipolar but evaluatively balanced Big Five traits as attribute contrasts and explored correlations of IATs with positive (e.g. sociable vs. conscientious) or negative (e.g. reserved vs. chaotic) attributes. Results showed (a) satisfactory internal consistencies for all IATs, (b) explicit–explicit and implicit–implicit correlations that were moderate to high and comparable in strength after both were corrected for attenuation and (c) better model fit for latent variable models that linked the implicit and explicit measures to distinct latent factors rather to the same factor. Together, the results suggest that IATs can validly assess the semantic aspect of trait self‐concepts and that implicit and explicit self‐representations are, although correlated, also distinct constructs. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Instruction-Based Approach-Avoidance Effects

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Van Dessel ◽  
Jan De Houwer ◽  
Anne Gast ◽  
Colin Tucker Smith
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Avoidance Training ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Approach And Avoidance ◽  
Evaluative Priming ◽  
Blacks And Whites ◽  
Approach Avoidance ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures

Prior research suggests that repeatedly approaching or avoiding a certain stimulus changes the liking of this stimulus. We investigated whether these effects of approach and avoidance training occur also when participants do not perform these actions but are merely instructed about the stimulus-action contingencies. Stimulus evaluations were registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test and evaluative priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). Instruction-based approach-avoidance effects were observed for relatively neutral fictitious social groups (i.e., Niffites and Luupites), but not for clearly valenced well-known social groups (i.e., Blacks and Whites). We conclude that instructions to approach or avoid stimuli can provide sufficient bases for establishing both implicit and explicit evaluations of novel stimuli and discuss several possible reasons for why similar instruction-based approach-avoidance effects were not found for valenced well-known stimuli.

scholarly journals The target/perpetrator brief-implicit association test (B-IAT): an implicit instrument for efficiently measuring discrimination based on race/ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, weight, and age

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maddalena Marini ◽  
Pamela D. Waterman ◽  
Emry Breedlove ◽  
Jarvis T. Chen ◽  
Christian Testa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Orientation ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Mental Representations ◽  
Association Test ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures

Abstract Background To date, research assessing discrimination has employed primarily explicit measures (i.e., self-reports), which can be subject to intentional and social desirability processes. Only a few studies, focusing on sex and race/ethnicity discrimination, have relied on implicit measures (i.e., Implicit Association Test, IAT), which permit assessing mental representations that are outside of conscious control. This study aims to advance measurement of discrimination by extending the application of implicit measures to multiple types of discrimination and optimizing the time required for the administration of these instruments. Methods Between September 27th 2019 and February 9th 2020, we conducted six experiments (984 participants) to assess implicit and explicit discrimination based on race/ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, weight, and age. Implicit discrimination was measured by using the Brief-Implicit Association Test (B-IAT), a new validated version of the IAT developed to shorten the time needed (from ≈15 to ≈2 min) to assess implicit mental representations, while explicit discrimination was assessed using self-reported items. Results Among participants (mean age = 37.8), 68.6% were White Non-Hispanic; 69% were females; 76.1% were heterosexual; 90.7% were gender conforming; 52.8% were medium weight; and 41.5% had an advanced level of education. Overall, we found implicit and explicit recognition of discrimination towards all the target groups (stronger for members of the target than dominant groups). Some exceptions emerged in experiments investigating race/ethnicity and weight discrimination. In the racism experiment, only people of Color showed an implicit recognition of discrimination towards the target group, while White people were neutral. In the fatphobia experiment, participants who were not heavy showed a slight implicit recognition of discrimination towards the dominant group, while heavy participants were neutral. Conclusions This study provides evidence that the B-IAT is a valuable tool for quickly assessing multiple types of implicit discrimination. It shows also that implicit and explicit measures can display diverging results, thus indicating that research would benefit from the use of both these instruments. These results have important implications for the assessment of discrimination in health research as well as in social and psychological science.

scholarly journals Twenty-Five Years of Research Using Implicit Measures

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. s1-s25
Author(s):  
Bertram Gawronski ◽  
Jan De Houwer ◽  
Jeffrey W. Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
25Th Anniversary ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Current Article ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures ◽  
Theoretical Developments

The year 2020 marks the 25th anniversary of two seminal publications that have set the foundation for an exponentially growing body of research using implicit measures: Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, and Williams's (1995) work using evaluative priming to measure racial attitudes, and Greenwald and Banaji's (1995) review of implicit social cognition research that served as the basis for the development of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The current article provides an overview of (1) two conceptual roots that continue to shape interpretations of implicit measures; (2) conflicting interpretations of the term implicit; (3) different kinds of dissociations between implicit and explicit measures; (4) theoretical developments inspired by these dissociations; and (5) research that used implicit measures to address domain-specific and applied questions. We conclude with a discussion of challenges and open questions that remain to be addressed, offering guidance for the next generation of research using implicit measures.

Predicting Spontaneous Big Five Behavior with Implicit Association Tests

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie C. Steffens ◽  
Stefanie Schulze König
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
Association Tests ◽  
Spontaneous Behavior ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures

According to theories brought forward recently, implicit measures based on reaction times, for instance Implicit Association Tests (IATs), should predict spontaneous behavior better than explicit measures. We applied five IATs to the measurement of the Big Five personality factors and tested whether the IATs predicted spontaneous behavior. The results show that, although implicit and explicit measures of personality dimensions were related at times, the correlations between them and with behavior suggest that these constructs should be differentiated. IATs predicted spontaneous behavior, but explicit measures did not. In contrast, explicit measures, but not IATs, were related to transparent self-ratings of behavior.

Is the Implicit Association Test Immune to Faking?

2004 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 165-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie C. Steffens
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Association Test ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Empirical Question ◽  
Limited Experience ◽  
Explicit Measures ◽  
Questionnaire Measures

Abstract. One of the main advantages of measures of automatic cognition is supposed to be that they are less susceptible to faking than explicit tests. It is an empirical question, however, to what degree these measures can be faked, and the response might well differ for different measures. We tested whether the Implicit Association Test (IAT, Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998 ) cannot be faked as easily as explicit measures of the same constructs. We chose the Big-Five dimensions conscientiousness and extraversion as the constructs of interest. The results show, indeed, that the IAT is much less susceptible to faking than questionnaire measures are, even if no selective faking of single dimensions of the questionnaire occurred. However, given limited experience, scores on the IAT, too, are susceptible to faking.

Applying the IAT to Assess Big Five Personality Traits

2016 ◽  
pp. 113-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Dentale ◽  
Michele Vecchione ◽  
Claudio Barbaranelli
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Big Five Personality Traits ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Degree Of Dissociation ◽  
Future Research Directions ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures

This chapter reviews the studies that applied the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to assess the Big Five personality traits, focusing on issues related to measurement and validity. After a brief introduction on the implicit self-concept of personality, the following five issues are critically reviewed: (1) the experimental procedure of both classical and questionnaire-based Big Five IATs, (2) the factorial structure and reliability of the implicit traits and the degree of dissociation between implicit and explicit measures, (3) the state and trait components of implicit scores, (4) the predictive validity of the Big-Five IATs with respect to relevant behavioural criteria, and (5) the robustness to faking of the Big Five IATs. Future research directions for the implicit measures of the Big Five were discussed.

scholarly journals A Multitrait-Multimethod Validation of the Implicit Association Test

2007 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Nosek ◽  
Frederick L. Smyth
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Association Test ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Dual Representation ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Attitude Factor ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

Abstract. Recent theoretical and methodological innovations suggest a distinction between implicit and explicit evaluations. We applied Campbell and Fiske's (1959) classic multitrait-multimethod design precepts to test the construct validity of implicit attitudes as measured by the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Participants (N = 287) were measured on both self-report and IAT for up to seven attitude domains. Through a sequence of latent-variable structural models, systematic method variance was distinguished from attitude variance, and a correlated two-factors-per-attitude model (implicit and explicit factors) was superior to a single-factor-per-attitude specification. That is, despite sometimes strong relations between implicit and explicit attitude factors, collapsing their indicators into a single attitude factor resulted in relatively inferior model fit. We conclude that these implicit and explicit measures assess related but distinct attitude constructs. This provides a basis for, but does not distinguish between, dual-process and dual-representation theories that account for the distinctions between constructs.

Applying the IAT to Assess Big Five Personality Traits

2015 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Francesco Dentale ◽  
Michele Vecchione ◽  
Claudio Barbaranelli
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Big Five Personality Traits ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Degree Of Dissociation ◽  
Future Research Directions ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Explicit Measures

This chapter reviews the studies that applied the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to assess the Big Five personality traits, focusing on issues related to measurement and validity. After a brief introduction on the implicit self-concept of personality, the following five issues are critically reviewed: (1) the experimental procedure of both classical and questionnaire-based Big Five IATs, (2) the factorial structure and reliability of the implicit traits and the degree of dissociation between implicit and explicit measures, (3) the state and trait components of implicit scores, (4) the predictive validity of the Big-Five IATs with respect to relevant behavioural criteria, and (5) the robustness to faking of the Big Five IATs. Future research directions for the implicit measures of the Big Five were discussed.

scholarly journals Relationship between the Implicit Association Test and explicit measures of intergroup cognition: Data from the meta-analysis by Kurdi et al. (2018)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedek Kurdi ◽  
Mahzarin R. Banaji
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Present Report ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Association Test ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Explicit Measures

In the present report we provide a brief summary of the relationship between implicit and explicit measures of social cognition based on the meta-analytic database analyzed in more detail with respect to the relationship between measures of social cognition and measures of intergroup behavior by Kurdi et al. (2018). In the present analysis, a statistically significant but small relationship emerged between implicit and parallel explicit measures of attitudes, stereotypes, and identity. The implicit–explicit relationship was characterized by high levels of statistical heterogeneity, thus making moderator analyses necessary. Implicit and explicit measures were more highly correlated with each other in studies (a) of sexual orientation (relative to other target group categories), (b) using the improved scoring algorithm to index IAT performance, (c) conducted using real-world or online samples (relative to general, student, and preselected samples), (d) conducted using foreign samples (relative to U.S. samples), and (e) conducted by authors with higher levels of experience involving the Implicit Association Test. Other variables that, based on theoretical or practical considerations, may have been expected to produce an effect had no impact.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document