The Relation Between Evaluation and Racial Categorization of Emotional Faces

Axt, Jordan; Bar‐Anan, Yoav; Vianello, Michelangelo

doi:10.1177/1948550619848000

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we found no evidence that this is the case. The present results are consistent with previous research that suggested that the category labels have a larger effect on measurement quality than the specific items categorized to these categories (Axt et al, 2020;Mitchell, Nosek & Banaji, 2003). Practically, our results reassure researchers looking to use the IAT that their results are unlikely to be overly influenced by specific evaluative stimuli in the IAT, so long as those stimuli are unambiguously associated with the relevant attributes and do not have clear confounds with the selected categories (e.g., Steffens & Plewe, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The good and the bad: Are some attribute words better than others in the Implicit Association Test?

Axt¹,

Feng²,

Bar‐Anan³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is one of the most popular measures in psychological research. A lack of standardization across IATs has resulted in significant variability among stimuli used by researchers, including the positive and negative words used in evaluative IATs. Does the variability in attribute words in evaluative IATs produce unwanted variability in measurement quality across studies? The present work investigated the effect of evaluative stimuli across three studies using 13 IATs and over 60,000 participants. The 64 positive and negative words that we tested provided similar measurement quality. Further, measurement was satisfactory even in IATs that used only category labels as stimuli. These results suggest that common sense is probably a sufficient method for selection of evaluative stimuli in the IAT. For a reasonable measurement quality, we recommend researchers who use evaluative IATs in English to randomly select words from the set we tested in the present research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The good and the bad: Are some attribute words better than others in the Implicit Association Test?

Axt¹,

Feng²,

Bar‐Anan³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies 3a and 3b are noteworthy because they present one of the first uses of SEM to show evidence for the incremental predictive validity of implicit attitudes. The few existing tests of incremental predictive validity of implicit associations using SEM have produced positive (Axt et al, 2019), negative (Brick & Lai, 2018), and mixed (Buttrick et al, 2020) results. The present work expands this literature by providing evidence for the incremental predictive validity of implicit attitudes for a number of outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Transgender Attitudes Independently Predict Beliefs About Gender and Transgender People

Axt

Conway

Westgate

et al. 2020

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surprisingly little is known about transgender attitudes, partly due to a need for improved measures of beliefs about transgender people. Four studies introduce a novel Implicit Association Test (IAT) assessing implicit attitudes toward transgender people. Study 1 ( N = 294) found significant implicit and explicit preferences for cisgender over transgender people, both of which correlated with transphobia and transgender-related policy support. Study 2 ( N = 1,094) found that implicit transgender attitudes predicted similar outcomes among participants reporting no explicit preference for cisgender versus transgender people. Across Study 3a ( N = 5,647) and Study 3b ( N = 2,276), implicit transgender attitudes predicted multiple outcomes, including gender essentialism, contact with transgender people, and support for transgender-related policies, over and above explicit attitudes. This work introduces a reliable means of measuring implicit transgender attitudes and illustrates how these attitudes independently predict meaningful beliefs and experiences.

show abstract

“…Participants completed the same explicit preference measure as in Studies 1a-1b. For SEM analyses, the explicit construct was estimated by using standardized responses to the relative preference item and each of the two difference scores concerning positivity and warmth (see Axt, Bar-Anan, et al, 2020 for a similar approach). We again used the average of the three standardized variables to form a single aggregate explicit attitude variable for correlational analyses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%