2009
DOI: 10.1037/a0015575
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity.

Abstract: This review of 122 research reports (184 independent samples, 14,900 subjects) found average r = .274 for prediction of behavioral, judgment, and physiological measures by Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures. Parallel explicit (i.e., self-report) measures, available in 156 of these samples (13,068 subjects), also predicted effectively (average r = .361), but with much greater variability of effect size. Predictive validity of self-report was impaired for socially sensitive topics, for which impression man… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

110
2,185
15
38

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,622 publications
(2,429 citation statements)
references
References 189 publications
110
2,185
15
38
Order By: Relevance
“…Faster responses when Black and Bad (and White and Good) required the same key press, as compared to the reverse, reflect more anti-Black (or pro-White) implicit attitudes (Greenwald et al, 2009). Implicit bias was computed according to the D measure (Greenwald et al, 2003).…”
Section: Implicit Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Faster responses when Black and Bad (and White and Good) required the same key press, as compared to the reverse, reflect more anti-Black (or pro-White) implicit attitudes (Greenwald et al, 2009). Implicit bias was computed according to the D measure (Greenwald et al, 2003).…”
Section: Implicit Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, these cognitions can have a strong impact on physiological responses [35] and behavior [36]. Measures of implicit cognition aim to provide an index of an attitude or cognition without requiring a participant's awareness or conscious access to the attribute under investigation [37,38].…”
Section: Implicit Cognition and Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Differences in the speed of correct responses in each condition serve as a proxy for how tightly the concepts are associated in the participant's mind 31. Faster responses in condition 1 than condition 2 indicate a stereotypical association of men with strength and women with weakness—the greater the time differences between the 2 conditions, the stronger the implicit association 44. The risk‐taking IAT was procedurally the same, except that it measured implicit gender bias on “takes risk versus avoids risk.”…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%