Publication: Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity.
Date
2009
Published Version
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.
Citation
Greenwald, Anthony G., T. Andrew Poehlman, Eric Luis Uhlmann, and Mahzarin R. Banaji. 2009. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, no. 1: 17–41. doi:10.1037/a0015575.
Research Data
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 management may distort self-report responses. For 32 samples with criterion measures involving Black–White interracial behavior, predictive validity of IAT measures significantly exceeded that of self-report measures. Both IAT and self-report measures displayed incremental validity, with each measure predicting criterion variance beyond that predicted by the other. The more highly IAT and self-report measures were intercorrelated, the greater was the predictive validity of each.
Description
Other Available Sources
Keywords
Implicit Association Test, implicit measures, validity, implicit attitudes, attitude-behavior relations
Terms of Use
Metadata Only