TARGET ARTICLE: Attributions of Implicit Prejudice, or "Would Jesse Jackson 'Fail' the Implicit Association Test?"

Arkes, Hal R.; Tetlock, Philip E.

doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1504_01

Cited by 356 publications

(254 citation statements)

References 124 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

246

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most cited potential extra-personal influence is cultural knowledge on IATs designed to measure attitudes (see also Arkes & Tetlock, 2004). For example, an IAT measuring racial attitudes may be confounded by people's cultural knowledge that Blacks are devalued in general.…”

Section: Method-specific Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

Hofmann¹,

Gschwendner²,

Nosek³

2005

European Review of Social Psychology

178

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit and explicit indicators of attitudes or personality traits are positively, and variably, related. This review places the question of implicit -explicit consistency into the tradition of attitude/trait -behaviour consistency (e.g., Wicker, 1969). Drawing on dual-process models, such as the recent distinction between associative and propositional representations (Strack & Deutsch, 2004), we identify a working model of implicit -explicit consistency that organises the empirical evidence on implicit -explicit moderation into five factors: translation between implicit and explicit representations (e.g., representational strength, awareness), additional information integration for explicit representations (e.g., need for cognition), properties of explicit assessment (e.g., social desirability concerns), properties of implicit assessment (e.g., situational malleability), and research design factors (e.g., sampling bias, measurement correspondence).A significant proportion of psychological research over the last three decades concerns the automatic nature of information processing (Bargh, 1997;Khilstrom, 1999;Wegner & Bargh, 1998). Theory and empirical data have broadened notions of core psychological concepts like attitudes, stereotypes, self-concept, goals, personality, and self-esteem to include not Correspondence should be addressed to Wilhelm Hofmann, Fachbereich 8 -Psychologie Universita¨t Koblenz-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829 Landau, Germany. Email: hofmannw@ uni-landau.de Preparation of this chapter was supported by a grant from the German Science Foundation (DFG) to Manfred Schmitt (Schm 1092/5-1) and by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health to Brian Nosek (R01 MH-068447). We would like to thank Rainer Banse, Boris Egloff, Malte Friese, Bertram Gawronski, and Jane Thompson for valuable comments on an earlier version of this chapter.EUROPEAN REVIEW OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2005, 16, 335 -390 2005 European Association of Experimental Social Psychology http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/10463283.html DOI: 10.1080/10463280500443228 just the explicit assessments that are products of introspection, but also implicit components of these constructs that may occur outside of conscious awareness or control (Asendorpf, Banse, & Mu¨cke, 2002;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000). Whereas implicit constructs are assumed to operate automatically and may be inaccessible to conscious experience, their explicit counterparts are conceptualised as reflective (conscious) and capacity-consuming mental representations that influence action through deliberation (e.g., Bargh, 1994;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). This distinction plays a role in a variety of dual-process theories that distinguish two modes of information processing such as implicit vs explicit (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Wilson et al., 2000), automatic vs controlled (Bargh, 1994), impulsive vs reflective (Strack & Deutsch, 2004), and associative vs rule-based (Sloman, 1996;Smith & DeCoster, 2000). These theories share an assumpti...

show abstract

Section: Method-specific Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

Hofmann¹,

Gschwendner²,

Nosek³

2005

European Review of Social Psychology

178

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Distinct evaluations should be more easily identified in relative standing compared to others than evaluations that are not distinct. Therefore, stronger I-E correlations between persons should emerge for more distinct evaluations.The hypothesis that implicit measures are confounded by extrapersonal associations, such as cultural knowledge, would lead to exactly the opposite prediction about the relationship between distinctiveness and I-E correspondence (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004;Karpinski & Hilton, 2001;Olson & Fazio, 2004). From that perspective, implicit measures, such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT), are influenced by extrapersonal associations, such as cultural norms, that do not contribute to one's evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moderators of the Relationship Between Implicit and Explicit Evaluation.

Nosek¹

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

577

462

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automatic and controlled modes of evaluation sometimes provide conflicting reports of the quality of social objects. This article presents evidence for 4 moderators of the relationship between automatic (implicit) and controlled (explicit) evaluations. Implicit and explicit preferences were measured for a variety of object pairs using a large sample. The average correlation was r ϭ .36, and 52 of the 57 object pairs showed a significant positive correlation. Results of multilevel modeling analyses suggested that (a) implicit and explicit preferences are related, (b) the relationship varies as a function of the objects assessed, and (c) at least 4 variables moderate the relationship: self-presentation, evaluative strength, dimensionality, and distinctiveness. The variables moderated implicit-explicit correspondence across individuals and accounted for much of the observed variation across content domains. The resulting model of the relationship between automatic and controlled evaluative processes is grounded in personal experience with the targets of evaluation.Keywords: implicit attitudes, explicit attitudes, moderation, implicit-explicit correspondence, dualprocess models A persistent question for psychologists concerns how conscious experience corresponds with the content and processes of the mind. It is clear that conscious experience is not a direct reflection of mental operations and a variety of mental activities are unavailable to introspection (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977). This observation has been extended to attitudes, the association between a concept and an evaluation (Fazio, Chen, McDonel, & Sherman, 1982), by making a theoretical distinction between implicit and explicit evaluations. The former reflects evaluative information activated automatically and perhaps without intention or awareness; the latter reflects evaluations produced by controlled processes (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000).Measurement innovation has paralleled this theoretical innovation with the development of indirect means for assessing conceptevaluation associations. Results from indirect measures have surprised psychologists and respondents by often revealing evaluations that contradict those assessed directly. In comparison to explicit measures, implicit measures assess evaluation in constrained conditions that include one or more hallmarks of automaticity: unawareness, uncontrollability, lack of intention, or efficiency of processing (Bargh, 1994). Comparisons of implicit and explicit measures suggest that they tap related but distinct constructs (Cunningham, Preacher, & Banaji, 2001;Greenwald & Farnham, 2000;Nosek & Smyth, 2005) and that both modes of evaluation may have important implications for social perception, judgment, and action (Banaji, 2001;Chen & Bargh, 1999;Devine, 1989;Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, & Howard, 1997;Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Greenwald & Nosek, 2001;Poehlman, Uhlmann, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2004). The purpose of this article is to...

show abstract

“…But it would be hasty to infer much from these results. I don't doubt that philosophers would exhibit implicit associations, however some of these findings may only reflect the inductive absorption of cultural knowledge rather than agonistic attitudes [16], such as that teenagers are more rebellious, moody, and vulgar than the elderly, or that men are engineers more often than women [17,18]. Other results might have an explanation besides racism or sexism, such as that "outsiders" are implicitly associated with negative words regardless of their racial background [19].…”

Section: What Does the Research Show?mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Certainly Ceci and Williams' research is also controversial, 15 and there is no assumption here that it should be accorded more weight than any other study, though we must consider whether some of the negative responses they have received are motivated by hostility to their findings-the reader is challenged to even find a favorable mention of their work in a mainstream philosophy journal. 16 There has been little direct work in the humanities. One exception is a widely reported recent study by Milkman et al [72] purporting to show that prospective graduate students were more likely to get a reply if their email used a stereotypically "white sounding" name.…”

Section: Other Evidence Concerning Implicit Bias In Academiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat, and Political Correctness in Philosophy

Hermanson

2017

Philosophies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper offers an unorthodox appraisal of empirical research bearing on the question of the low representation of women in philosophy. It contends that fashionable views in the profession concerning implicit bias and stereotype threat are weakly supported, that philosophers often fail to report the empirical work responsibly, and that the standards for evidence are set very low-so long as you take a certain viewpoint.

show abstract

TARGET ARTICLE: Attributions of Implicit Prejudice, or "Would Jesse Jackson 'Fail' the Implicit Association Test?"

Cited by 356 publications

References 124 publications

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

Moderators of the Relationship Between Implicit and Explicit Evaluation.

Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat, and Political Correctness in Philosophy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About