ArticleNature human behaviour2026
Challenging the mechanism for the implicit association test.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implicit biases are stereotypes and attitudes that influence decisions and actions, contributing to discrimination and societal inequities. The implicit association test is the most widely used tool for measuring implicit bias, assessing response time in sorting stimuli into labelled categories. Most interpretations assume that implicit association test performance (D-scores) reflects conflicting associative memories or decision ease. We challenged this assumption by decomposing D-scores into additional cognitive processes that may influence results, particularly response caution-the tendency to trade speed for accuracy. Using racing diffusion models across 39 topics (N = 115,601), we found that response caution explained significantly more variance in D-scores beyond decision ease. Response caution also best predicted explicitly reported biases. These findings challenge the traditional interpretation of D-scores as primarily reflecting associative memory activation and highlight the need to consider multiple cognitive processes when assessing implicit biases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41992053What 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.