The Brief Implicit Association Test

Narayanan, Sriram; Greenwald, Anthony G.

doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.4.283

Cited by 430 publications

(385 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

366

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To examine the effects of interventions on implicit preferences for Whites over Blacks on the MC-IAT, we modeled implicit preferences for Whites over Blacks as a function of condition. A oneway analysis of variance revealed a significant effect of condition on implicit preferences for Whites over Blacks, F(12, 1933) (Nosek et al, 2013;Sriram & Greenwald, 2009), whereas the IAT is attentive to both positive and negative associations. Using a similar procedure, Nosek and colleagues (2012) found that Bad was more strongly associated with Blacks than Whites and that this association was relatively independent of associations with Good.…”

Section: Implicit Preferences For Whites Compared To Blacks On the MCmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.

Lai¹,

Marini

Lehr

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

531

482

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many methods for reducing implicit prejudice have been identified, but little is known about their relative effectiveness. We held a research contest to experimentally compare interventions for reducing the expression of implicit racial prejudice. Teams submitted seventeen interventions that were tested an average of 3.70 times each in four studies (total N = 17,021), with rules for revising interventions between studies. Eight of seventeen interventions were effective at reducing implicit preferences for Whites compared to Blacks, particularly ones that provided experience with counterstereotypical exemplars, used evaluative conditioning methods, and provided strategies to override biases. The other nine interventions were ineffective, particularly ones that engaged participants with others' perspectives, asked participants to consider egalitarian values, or induced a positive emotion. The most potent interventions were ones that invoked high self-involvement or linked Black people with positivity and White people with negativity. No intervention consistently reduced explicit racial preferences. Furthermore, intervention effectiveness only weakly extended to implicit preferences for Asians and Hispanics. Abstract = 160 words Keywords = attitudes, racial prejudice, implicit social cognition, malleability, Implicit Association Test September 9, 2016 update: We updated this manuscript to fix several minor reporting errors that we have learned about since the publication of the manuscript in August 2014. For a summary of these updates, please see pages 67 and 68. Authors' note:This project was supported by a gift from Project Implicit. Lai and Hawkins are consultants and Nosek is an officer of Project Implicit, Inc., a non-profit organization that includes in its mission "To develop and deliver methods for investigating and applying phenomena of implicit social cognition, including especially phenomena of implicit bias based on age, race, gender or other factors. Thoughts and feelings outside of conscious awareness shape social perception, judgment and action (Bargh, 1999;Devine, 1989;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). Nowhere has this idea been more explored than in studies of racial prejudice in which people report egalitarian racial attitudes, but also implicitly prefer Whites compared to Blacks (Devine, 1989;Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, & Howard, 1997;Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;. These studies have been influential because implicit racial preferences predict behaviors such as negative interracial contact (McConnell & Leibold, 2001), biases in medical decision-making (Green et al., 2007), and hiring discrimination (Rooth, 2010).From the hundreds of studies conducted, we can conclude that implicit preferences (1) are related to, but distinct from, explicit preferences (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;, (2) are constructed through different mechanisms than explicit preferences (De Houwer, Teige-Mocigemba, Spruyt, & Moors, 2009;Ranganath & Nosek, 2008;Ratliff & Nosek, 2011;Rydell & McConnell, 2006), ...

show abstract

Section: Implicit Preferences For Whites Compared To Blacks On the MCmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…We employed two implicit measures that, despite their shared reliance on categorization, have unique psychometric properties (Sriram & Greenwald, 2009;Nosek et al, 2014). We also considered using priming-based implicit measures that may capture distinct aspects of implicit racial attitudes but did not use in this research design.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.

Lai¹,

Marini

Lehr

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

531

482

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Implicit racial attitudes. Participants completed a four-block, good-focal Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT; Sriram & Greenwald, 2009) measuring the strength of the association between the concepts "Good" and "Bad" and the categories "White people" and "Black people".…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

Axt¹,

Ebersole²,

Nosek³

2016

Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PRO-BLACK BIAS IN SOCIAL JUDGMENT 2 AbstractEmpirical evidence and social commentary demonstrate favoring of Whites over Blacks in attitudes, social judgment, and social behavior. In 6 studies (N > 4,000), we provide evidence for a pro-Black bias in academic decision-making. When making multiple admissions decisions for an academic honor society, participants from undergraduate and online samples had a more relaxed acceptance criterion for Black than White candidates, even though participants possessed implicit and explicit preferences for Whites over Blacks. This pro-Black criterion bias persisted among subsamples that wanted to be unbiased and believed they were unbiased. It also persisted even when participants were given warning of the bias or incentives to perform accurately.These results suggest opportunity for theoretical and empirical innovation on the conditions under which biases in social judgment favor and disfavor different social groups, and how those biases manifest outside of awareness or control. If there is one conclusion to draw from decades of research on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination in the United States, it is that Whites are treated more favorably than Blacks (Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014;List, 2004;Pager & Shepherd, 2008). Historically, this is understood in the context of slavery, lynchings, segregation, and state-sponsored discrimination.But, evidence from late 20th and early 21st century research suggests that the effects persist, if in subtler, even unintentional forms (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Nosek, Smyth et al., 2007). Whites exhibited associations, attitudes, or behaviors that favored Whites over Blacks, and two papers in which Whites had attitudes, associations or behaviors that favored Blacks over Whites.In the first instance of pro-Black behavior (Unzueta, Everly & Gutierrez, 2014), White participants reported greater liking for a Black than White person after each complained about experiencing discrimination. In the other instance (Galinsky, Hall, & Cuddy, 2013), a majorityWhite sample was more likely to choose a Black female than White female candidate for a leadership position within a company, though White males were preferred over Black males.That such a majority of the research finds preferences for Whites over Blacks is perhaps not surprising given that, on average, Whites show explicit and implicit preferences for Whites PRO-BLACK BIAS IN SOCIAL JUDGMENT

show abstract

“…The Brief IAT (BIAT; Sriram, & Greenwald, 2009) was used as the implicit measure. Behaviorally, the critical response blocks for the task are identical to the IAT; however, perceptually, participants' attention can be focused on the category associated with good or the category associated with bad.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to compare good and bad associations, I needed to find a way to measure them separately. Recent theory and evidence has suggested that the Brief IAT (Sriram, & Greenwald, 2009) may be able to capture distinct "Good" and "Bad" components of evaluation (Axt and Nosek, in prep). Using these implicit measures, I investigated whether external attributions for negative events resulted in either good and bad association formation or neutralization of association formation.…”

Section: Study 3 Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Propositional Processes of Attribution (Sometimes) Influence Implicit Attitudes

Schmidt¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mainstream theoretical perspectives disagree on whether propositional processes influence implicit attitude formation and change. This dissertation addresses these opposing views by testing whether propositional knowledge in the form of attributions about the cause of negative or positive events impacts implicit attitudes. Overall, evidence supported the perspective that attributional processes influence implicit attitude formation. In Studies 1 through 4, participants were given the same information with different causal relationships to suggest either internal or external attributions of positive or negative events. In Studies 1, 2a, and 4, suggesting external attributions led to weaker explicit and implicit attitudes than suggesting internal attributions. In some studies, preconditions for testing the effect of attributions were not met: explicit attitudes were not influenced by the attribution manipulation (3 of 4 conditions in Study 4), or the implicit measure was insensitive to the manipulation (Study 3). I also observed mixed evidence regarding the impact of attributional processes on implicit attitude change. Studies 2a, 2b, and 5 measured attitudes before and after attribution manipulations for positive and negative events. Implicit attitudes varied by attribution condition after the manipulation in Study 2a and changed for negative events in Study 5 such that external attributions of negative events decreased implicit negativity. When no implicit preference was created initially (positive scenario conditions in Study 5) or initial preferences were not in the expected direction (Study 2b), external attributions did not change implicit attitudes. Across studies, the manipulations that impacted implicit attitude formation and change were emotionally evocative and conspicuous. Placed in a larger context of implicit attitude theory, this dissertation suggests that propositional processes do influence implicit attitudes under conditions where propositional knowledge drastically changes the meaning of the corresponding associations.

show abstract

The Brief Implicit Association Test

Cited by 430 publications

References 23 publications

Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.

Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

Propositional Processes of Attribution (Sometimes) Influence Implicit Attitudes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About