An inkblot for attitudes: affect misattribution as implicit measurement.

By Brian K. Payne, Clara Michelle Cheng, O. Govorun, Brandon D. Stewart, Keith Payne We, Richard E. Petty, Larry L. Jacoby, Elizabeth Marsh. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2005

1,353 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3b49ca5cf3c28915b9a996a1e899a9d7f1b8a4b4

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Habit slips: when consumers unintentionally resist new products (2017, methodology): “Finally, all participants completed an assessment of implicit attitudes toward the product using the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP), described below in the Measures section (Payne et al. 2005), and reported on their initial thoughts about it.”
I like you, I like you not: Understanding the formation of context-dependent automatic attitudes (2009, methodology): “For instance, Petty et al. (2006) have shown that automatic evaluations in a given context reflect the average of early and later acquired information, when heterogeneous information was encoded in the same context.”
Implicit Social Cognitions Predict Sex Differences in Math Engagement and Achievement (2011, background): “Alternatives include the Affective Misattribution Procedure (AMP; Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005), evaluative priming (Fazio, Sanbonmatsu, Powell, & Kardes, 1986), Go/No-Go Association Task (GNAT; Nosek & Banaji, 2001), the Sorting Paired Features task (SPF; BarAnan, Nosek, & Vianello, 2009)”
Assessment of Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition A Review of IAT Measures (2008, positive): “Better psychometric properties were shown for the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP; Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Steward, 2005 ) that represents a variant of the affective priming task.”
What moderates implicit—explicit consistency? (2005, background): “Even so, in the domain of prejudice, numerous investigations have found evidence for implicit – explicit consistency moderation using Dunton and Fazio’s (1997) motivation to control prejudice scale as a domain-specific adjustment construct (Banse & Gawronski, 2003; Banse, Seise, & Zerbes, 2001; Dunt”
Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. (2009, background): “…before the term implicit measures came into use, nor the fact that TAT scores are derived from the content rather than the speed of responses (see Payne et al., 2005, for a measure that is based on the content of responses and that is generally considered to be implicit), is relevant for…”
When the method makes a difference: Antagonistic effects on “automatic evaluations” as a function of task characteristics of the measure (2009, methodology): “Based on the aforementioned differences between the BFP and the AMP, we argue that the obtained dissociation has their roots in the presence versus absence of RI mechanisms.”
Mimicry reduces racial prejudice (2012, neutral): “60, replicating past work (Payne et al., 2005).”
Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election (2010, neutral): “Payne et al. / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46 (2010) 367–374”
Control me or I will control you: Impulses, trait self-control, and the guidance of behavior (2009, methodology): “To generalize our findings, we used two different implicit measures to assess automatic affective reactions, a variant of the IAT (Karpinski & Steinman, 2006; Studies 1 and 2a) and an AMP (Payne et al., 2005; Study 2b).”
Understanding patterns of attitude change: When implicit measures show change, but explicit measures do not ☆ (2008, methodology): “As a measure of automatic associations, we used Payne et al.’s (2005) AMP. On each trial of the task, participants were first presented with a fixation cross for 1000 ms, which was replaced by one of the two pictures for 75 ms. Control trials involved a presentation of a grey square. The presentatio”
Will the Real Moral Judgment Please Stand Up? (2009, background): “1983), or she is motivated to be accurate (e.g., Lerner et al., 1998; although see Payne et al. 2005a for evidence that bias correction cannot always be successfully achieved).”