ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2022
The IRAP as a Measure of Implicit Cognition: A Case of Frankenstein's Monster.
Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing delayed matching to sample with three variations of the training-IRAP for establishing derived relations.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
- Development of self-stigma scale for adolescents in conflict with the law and its association with implicit self-stigma.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Reflecting upon Similarities and Differences among the IAT, the IRAP, and the FAST: Searching for Clarity.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Article
- The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure as a Measure of Sexual Orientation in Heterosexual, Bisexual, and Lesbian/Gay Men and Women.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025Article
- Lesbian and Heterosexual Women's Implicit Responses to Gender Figures.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- Recent Developments in RFT Encourage Interbehavioral Field-Based Views of Human Language and Cognition: A Preliminary Analysis.Perspectives on behavior science · 2024Review
- Grappling with the Complexity of Behavioral Processes in Human Psychological Suffering: Some Potential Insights from Relational Frame Theory.Perspectives on behavior science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) was initially developed as a way to assess the strength and probability of natural verbal relations, as defined within relational frame theory (RFT), and was conceptually rooted within the behavior-analytic tradition. However, the IRAP quickly became employed primarily as a measure of implicit cognition, more in line with mainstream psychology than behavior analysis. In doing so, research using the IRAP increasingly employed ill-defined mainstream psychological terms, focused on correlational analyses with traditional psychometry, and thus emphasized prediction over the prediction-and-influence of behavior. Although perhaps beneficial to the study of implicit cognition, this approach could be argued to have limited the IRAP's utility in behavior analyses of human language and cognition. In the current article we will reflect on this suggestion, on the IRAPs place and current use in the field of behavior analysis, and on its potential future within behavioral psychology in light of recent conceptual and empirical advances in RFT. In doing so, it is hoped that the measure may be refined into a better understood, more precise, functional-analytic tool.
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.