Based on dual-process models, we assumed that risk taking depends on implicit and explicit risk attitudes and risk propensity. Specifically, we predicted that the convergence between these indicators would depend on the impulsiveness versus reflectiveness of risk behavior. Two objective personality tests (OPTs) of risk taking that measure risk behavior in standardized situations were employed. We predicted that the impulsive OPT would depend more on implicit risk dispositions. The reverse effect pattern was expected for the reflective OPT. Next, we expected that self-control would amplify the weight of explicit dispositions and attenuate that of implicit dispositions. At Time 1, two direct questionnaire measures of explicit risk proneness, three indirect measures of implicit risk proneness, and a self-control measure were administered. At Time 2, participants participated in a reflective and an impulsive gambling OPT. The assumed pattern of effects was obtained. We conclude with a discussion of future research avenues.

Three studies investigated the correspondence between implicit and explicit self-concepts of intelligence and how that correspondence is related to performance on different intelligence tests. Configurations of these two self-concepts were found to be consistently related to performance on intelligence tests in all three studies. For individuals who self-reported high intelligence (high explicit self-concept), a negative implicit self-concept (measured with the Implicit Association Test) led to a decrease in performance on intelligence tests. For participants whose self-report indicated a low self-concept of intelligence, positive automatic associations between the self and intelligence had a similar effect. In line with a stress hypothesis, the results indicate that any discrepant configuration of self-concepts will impair performance. Importantly, the prediction of performance on intelligence tests by the self-concept of intelligence was shown to be independent of self-esteem (Study 3).

We propose a single-block, single-target, Implicit Association Test (SB-ST-IAT) for measuring implicit disgust sensitivity. Based on dual process theories, we tested the construct validity of this new measure using a sample of N = 75 participants. Incremental validity of the newly developed SB-ST-IAT was demonstrated using a disgust sensitivity questionnaire as a direct measure of disgust sensitivity, as well as two behavioral criteria. A controlled approach versus avoidance task with disgusting stimuli (worms) was employed as a measure of controlled behavior. Facial disgust expression and withdrawal of hands and upper body from the disgust stimuli were used as indicators of automatic behavior. Implications of our research for the validation of indirect measures are discussed.

No abstract