Abstract
Self-concept is accessible information that can be used when facing a demanding task. Based on findings suggesting that effects observed in Implicit Association Tests (IATs) could be partially explained by the procedural features of the task, we investigated the role of participants’ self-inclusion in target categories for group IATs. We propose that IAT constraints lead participants to use self-relevant heuristics related to their membership of target categories in order to respond rapidly, which contributes to IAT group preferences. Thus positive IAT effects should dramatically diminish if participants were induced not to use self-related heuristics. Study 1 showed that when mapping outgroup names and idiosyncratic characteristics of participants onto the same category during the IAT task, the IAT effect no longer occurs. Study 2 replicated these findings when associating outgroup-participants’ idiosyncratic characteristics prior to the completion of the standard IAT. Therefore inhibiting the use of self-related heuristics reduces IAT effects. The implications of our results for the construct validity of prejudice IATs are discussed.
References
2003). Black Americans’ implicit racial associations and their implications for intergroup judgement. Social Cognition, 21, 61–87.
(2001). Implicit attitudes can be measured. In , The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 117–150). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
(1994). The self in social context. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 297–332.
(2005). L’effet du statut du groupe d’appartenance sur les attitudes ethniques implicites et explicites chez les enfants. Les Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 67–68, 65–76.
(2005). The Implicit Association Test as a general measure of similarity. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 228–239.
(2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347–368.
(2005). Faking the IAT: Aided and unaided response control on the Implicit Association Tests. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 307–316.
(2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A” and the “T”: Logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 74–147.
(2000). Using the Implicit Association Test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022–1038.
(1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
(1984). The self. In , Handbook of social cognition (pp. 129–178). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: What we know (so far) about the method. In , Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 59–102). New York: Guilford Press.
(2003). Method-specific variance in the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1180–1192.
(2004). Mere acceptance produces apparent attitude in the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 366–373.
(2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88.
(2003). Relations between implicit measures of prejudice: What are we measuring?. Psychological Science, 14, 636–639.
(2008). Validation expérimentale d’une mesure implicite du préjugé: Le test d’associations implicites. Grenoble, France: Université Pierre Mendès France Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
(1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 677–688.
(2004). Underlying processes in the Implicit Association Test (IAT): Dissociating salience from associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 139–165.
(2007). The mere acceptance effect: Can it influence responses on racial Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 787–793.
(2002a). E-prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
(2002b). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
(2004). Is the Implicit Association Test immune to faking?. Experimental Psychology, 51, 165–179.
(2008). Avoiding stimulus confounds in Implicit Association Tests by using the concepts as stimuli. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 217–243.
(2006). Predicting spontaneous Big Five behaviour with Implicit Association Test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22, 13–20.
(