Anomalies in implicit attitudes research

Self-Awareness and Stereotypes: Accurate Prediction of Implicit Gender Stereotyping

Research showing that people can predict the patterns of their implicit evaluations toward social groups has raised questions concerning how widely these findings extend to other domains, such as semantic implicit stereotyping. In a preregistered laboratory study, participants were asked to predict their scores on five implicit gender stereotyping Implicit Associations Tests (IATs). Within-subjects correlations between IAT score predictions and IAT scores showed high levels of accuracy. Although part of the IAT score patterns could be predicted from shared knowledge, own predictions significantly outperformed predictions of random others and normative patterns, suggesting self-awareness beyond reliance on shared knowledge. In line with dual-process models emphasizing that different information is captured by implicit as opposed to explicit measures, predictions explained correlations between implicit and traditional explicit stereotyping measures, and led to acknowledgment of bias. Discussion focuses on understanding conscious awareness of semantic automatic processes and conceptualizations of the cognitions underlying implicit measures.

Self-reported interoceptive accuracy and interoceptive attention differentially correspond to measures of visual attention and self-regard

Background

Interoception, the perception of bodily functions and sensations, is a crucial contributor to cognition, emotion, and well-being. However, the relationship between these three processes is not well understood. Further, it is increasingly clear that dimensions of interoception differentially corresponds to these processes, yet this is only recently being explored. The present study addresses two important questions: Are subjective interoceptive accuracy and interoceptive attention related to self-regard and well-being? And are they related to exteroceptive (visual) attention?

Methods

Participants (N = 98; 29% women; aged 23-64 years) completed: a battery of questionnaires to assess subjective accuracy (how well one predicts bodily sensations), interoceptive attention (a tendency to notice bodily signals), self-regard (self-esteem, self-image, life satisfaction), state negative affect (depression, anxiety, and stress), a self-esteem Implicit Association Task (a measure of implicit self-esteem), and a flanker task to assess visual selective attention. Subjective interoceptive accuracy and attention served as dependent variables. Correlations and principal component analysis was used to establish correlations among variables and determine how, or whether, these measures are associated with subjective interoceptive accuracy or attention.

Results

Greater scores on measures of self-regard, implicit self-esteem, cognition and lower negative affect were broadly associated with greater subjective interoceptive accuracy. Conversely, only explicit self-esteem, satisfaction with life, and self-image corresponded to subjective interoceptive attention. An exploratory analysis with a more inclusive scale of interoceptive attention was conducted. Results of this exploratory analysis showed that the broader measure was a stronger correlate to self-regard than subjective interoceptive accuracy, though it, too, did not correlate with visual attention. In short, both subjective interoceptive accuracy and attention corresponded to well-being and mental health, but only accuracy was associated with exteroceptive attention.

Conclusion

These results add to a growing literature suggesting different dimensions of (subjective) interoception differentially correspond to indices of well-being. The links between exteroceptive and interoceptive attention, and their association with merit further study.

Attribution Impacts Implicit (And Explicit) Evaluations

Two studies examined whether the attributional framing of negative events affected explicit evaluations, as measured by differences in liking, and implicit evaluations, as measured by the Implicit Association Test (Greenwald et al., 1998). In Study 1, participants read negative information about a novel target ordered to elicit internal or external attributions. Participants in the internal attribution condition evaluated the target more negatively than did those in the external attribution condition on both implicit and explicit measures. Study 2 replicated these results and tested the effects of attribution on recently formed negative evaluations. Participants who evaluated targets before and after receiving additional negative information about them demonstrated implicit and explicit evaluative change consistent with the attributional framing of that information. This research provides clear evidence that attribution influences the formation and change of implicit evaluations; however, these effects were weaker than those on explicit measures of evaluation.

Testing for implicit bias: Values, psychometrics, and science communication

Our understanding of implicit bias and how to measure it has yet to be settled. Various debates between cognitive scientists are unresolved. Moreover, the public's understanding of implicit bias tests continues to lag behind cognitive scientists'. These discrepancies pose potential problems. After all, a great deal of implicit bias research has been publicly funded. Further, implicit bias tests continue to feature in discourse about public- and private-sector policies surrounding discrimination, inequality, and even the purpose of science. We aim to do our part by reconstructing some of the recent arguments in ordinary language and then revealing some of the operative norms or values that are often hidden beneath the surface of these arguments. This may help the public learn more about the science of implicit bias. It may also help both laypeople and scientists reflect on the values, interests, and stakeholders involved in establishing, justifying, and communicating scientific research. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Social Development.

Whether implicit attitudes exist is one question, and whether we can measure individual differences effectively is another

Questions about measurement of individual differences in implicit attitudes, which have been the focus so far in this exchange, should be distinguished from more general questions about whether implicit attitudes exist and operate in our minds. Theorists frequently move too quickly from pessimistic results regarding the first set of questions to pessimistic conclusions about the second. That is, they take evidence that indirect measures such as the implicit association test (IAT) disappoint as individual difference measures and use it to (mistakenly) suggest that people do not in fact have implicit attitudes directed at stigmatized groups. In this commentary, I dissect this mistake in detail, drawing key lessons from a parallel debate that has unfolded in cognitive science about “conflict tasks” such as the Stroop task. I argue that the evidence overall supports a nuanced conclusion: Indirect measures such as the IAT measure individual differences in implicit attitudes poorly, but they—via distinct lines of evidence—still support the view that implicit attitudes exist.

This article is categorized under:

Psychology > Theory and Methods

Implicit and explicit attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women among heterosexual undergraduate and graduate psychology and nursing students

Objectives

To examine implicit and explicit attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women among heterosexual undergraduate and graduate psychology and nursing students.

Methods

Implicit attitudes were measured via the Implicit Association Test and explicit attitudes via the Attitudes Toward Lesbian Women and Gay questionnaire.

Main results

All groups held negative implicit attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women. Among undergraduates, nursing students reported holding more negative explicit attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women than psychology students.

Conclusion

The curricula in both nursing and psychology studies need to address the medical and paramedical needs and issues of sexual minorities.

It's time to do more research on the attitude-behavior relation: A commentary on implicit attitude measures

The recent exchange about implicit attitudes is an acute reminder of the need to pay research attention to the correlation between implicit attitudes and overt behavior. Current implicit measures are excellent to detect evaluatively relevant associations arising from specific and variable internal states and predict judgments when people lack the motivation and ability to control those judgments. However, there is no convincing evidence of a strong correlation between such implicit attitudes and overt behavior when people's ability and motivation to control the influence of these attitudes is low. Researchers should improve implicit measures by better integrating action, target, level, and context into the measurement procedures and then reexamine if these improved measures predict socially undesirable behaviors when ability and motivation to control behavior are low. This article is categorized under: Psychology > Theory and Methods Neuroscience > Behavior Neuroscience > Cognition.