Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
doi:10.22028/D291-40820
Title: | Best research practices for using the Implicit Association Test |
Author(s): | Greenwald, Anthony G. Brendl, Miguel Cai, Huajian Cvencek, Dario Dovidio, John F. Friese, Malte Hahn, Adam Hehman, Eric Hofmann, Wilhelm Hughes, Sean Hussey, Ian Jordan, Christian Kirby, Teri A. Lai, Calvin K. Lang, Jonas W. B. Lindgren, Kristen P. Maison, Dominika Ostafin, Brian D. Rae, James R. Ratliff, Kate A. Spruyt, Adriaan Wiers, Reinout W. |
Language: | English |
Title: | Behavior research methods : BRM |
Volume: | 54 |
Issue: | 3 |
Pages: | 1161-1180 |
Publisher/Platform: | Springer Nature |
Year of Publication: | 2022 |
Free key words: | implicit Association Test recommended research practices indirect attitude measurement implicit social cognition |
DDC notations: | 150 Psychology |
Publikation type: | Journal Article |
Abstract: | Interest in unintended discrimination that can result from implicit attitudes and stereotypes (implicit biases) has stimulated many research investigations. Much of this research has used the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to measure association strengths that are presumed to underlie implicit biases. It had been more than a decade since the last published treatment of recommended best practices for research using IAT measures. After an initial draft by the first author, and continuing through three subsequent drafts, the 22 authors and 14 commenters contributed extensively to refining the selection and description of recommendation-worthy research practices. Individual judgments of agreement or disagreement were provided by 29 of the 36 authors and commenters. Of the 21 recommended practices for conducting research with IAT measures presented in this article, all but two were endorsed by 90% or more of those who felt knowledgeable enough to express agreement or disagreement; only 4% of the totality of judgments expressed disagreement. For two practices that were retained despite more than two judgments of disagreement (four for one, five for the other), the bases for those disagreements are described in presenting the recommendations. The article additionally provides recommendations for how to report procedures of IAT measures in empirical articles. |
DOI of the first publication: | 10.3758/s13428-021-01624-3 |
URL of the first publication: | https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-021-01624-3 |
Link to this record: | urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-408203 hdl:20.500.11880/36679 http://dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-40820 |
ISSN: | 1554-3528 1554-351X |
Date of registration: | 24-Oct-2023 |
Faculty: | HW - Fakultät für Empirische Humanwissenschaften und Wirtschaftswissenschaft |
Department: | HW - Psychologie |
Professorship: | HW - Prof. Dr. Malte Friese |
Collections: | SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes |
Files for this record:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
s13428-021-01624-3.pdf | 510,09 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License