ArticlePerspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science2021
Can the Implicit Association Test Measure Automatic Judgment? The Validation Continues.
Article in Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of alcohol consumption on implicit racial bias.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2024Trial
- Implicit association tests for all: Using iatgen for non-English and offline samples.PloS one · 2026Article
- Using facial expressions instead of response keys in the implicit association test.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Implicit Sexual Cognitions in Women with Ambiphilic Sexual Attractions: A Comparison to Androphilic and Gynephilic Women.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- The Good, the Bad and the Hijab: A Study of Implicit Associations Made by Practicing Muslims in Their Native Muslim Country.Psychological reports · 2023Article
- The project implicit international dataset: Measuring implicit and explicit social group attitudes and stereotypes across 34 countries (2009-2019).Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Relationships between the race implicit association test and other measures of implicit and explicit social cognition.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Invalid Claims About the Validity of Implicit Association Tests by Prisoners of the Implicit Social-Cognition Paradigm.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this commentary, we welcome Schimmack's reanalysis of Bar-Anan and Vianello's multitrait multimethod (MTMM) data set, and we highlight some limitations of both the original and the secondary analyses. We note that when testing the fit of a confirmatory model to a data set, theoretical justifications for the choices of the measures to include in the model and how to construct the model improve the informational value of the results. We show that making different, theory-driven specification choices leads to different results and conclusions than those reported by Schimmack (this issue, p. 396). Therefore, Schimmack's reanalyses of our data are insufficient to cast doubt on the Implicit Association Test (IAT) as a measure of automatic judgment. We note other reasons why the validation of the IAT is still incomplete but conclude that, currently, the IAT is the best available candidate for measuring automatic judgment at the person level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.