A COGNITIVE SKILL CONFOUND ON THE IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST

By S. McFarland, Zachary Crouch. 2002

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2bc5fc0460acaebca887ea90f4226267b1e4eaf0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

THE IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST'S D MEASURE CAN MINIMIZE A COGNITIVE SKILL CONFOUND: COMMENT ON McFARLAND AND CROUCH (2002) (2004, methodology): “McFarland and Crouch (2002) reported substantial positive correlations (a) between the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and response speed and (b) between IATs assessing racism or self-esteem and ostensibly unrelated control IATs.”
The Implicit Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review (2007, background): “Subjects who perform the task more slowly overall tend to show larger IAT effects than those who perform more quickly (Greenwald et al., 2003; McFarland & Crouch, 2002).”
Do features of stimuli influence IAT effects (2006, background): “8 In line with McFarland and Crouch (2002), we attribute higher error rates to the increased cognitive load due to longer stimulus lists and”
Stereotypes, Bias, and Personnel Decisions: Strange and Stranger (2008, background): “It has been received by the scientific community with considerable skepticism (e.g., Blanton & Jaccard, 2006a, 2006b; Brendl, Markman, & Messner, 2001; Fazio & Olson, 2003; McFarland & Crouch, 2002; Rothermund & Wentura, 2004) for a number of reasons, including the following: 1.”
Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: II. Method Variables and Construct Validity (2005, background): “Resistance to effects of three known extraneous influences on IAT effects— average response latency (McFarland & Crouch, 2002), task pairing order, and experience with the IAT—also served as evaluation criteria (Greenwald et al., 2003).”
Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes (2007, unknown): “Thierry Devos”
Is the Implicit Association Test a Valid and Valuable Measure of Implicit Consumer Social Cognition (2004, background): “Some have suggested that response patterns from the IAT may be confounded with other factors such as a person's cognitive ability (McFarland & Crouch, 2002) or respondents' shift in response criterion during the difficult or incompatible mixed block of the test (e.g., " insects " with " pleasant; "…”
Reliability and validity of the Single‐Target IAT (ST‐IAT): assessing automatic affect towards multiple attitude objects (2008, methodology): “We controlled for irrelevant differences in response latency level and latency variability between participants by individually z-transforming participants’ latencies, thereby reducing method variance substantially (McFarland & Crouch, 2002; Mierke & Klauer, 2003).”
Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. (2009, background): “Finally, several studies (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2005; McFarland & Crouch, 2002; Mierke & Klauer, 2003) showed that effects in IAT tasks correlate even if the tasks are supposed to capture attributes that should not be correlated.”
Decoding the implicit association test: Implications for criterion prediction (2006, result): “These studies indicate that overall reaction times correlate with IAT difference scores (Greenwald et al., 2003; Hummert, Garstka, O’Brien, Greenwald, & Mellott, 2002; McFarland & Crouch, 2003 ) and that conceptually unrelated IAT share method variance (McFarland & Crouch, 2003).”
Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) (2006, background): “Second, a growing number of studies show that high IATþ scores can reflect unwanted intrusions of extraneous factors independent of a pre-existing attitude A (McFarland & Crouch, 2002; Mierke & Klauer, 2001, 2003; C. J. Mitchell, 2004; Rothermund &Wentura, 2001, 2004).”