Publication:
Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity.

Thumbnail Image

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.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

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

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories