Do features of stimuli influence IAT effects

By M. Bluemke, Malte Friese. 2006

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/47b765c9ded27310eda20bd196822b98f587277e

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

1. Malte Friese
2. M. Bluemke
3. Agnes Moors
4. Klaus Fiedler
5. Matthias Blümke
6. C. Messner
7. J. de Houwer
8. Adriaan Spruyt

In Social Psychology

1. Agnes Moors
2. Malte Friese
3. J. de Houwer
4. Wilhelm Hofmann
5. M. Bluemke
6. Manfred J. Schmitt
7. Klaus Fiedler
8. Matthias Blümke

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Malte Friese
2. J. de Houwer
3. M. Bluemke
4. Wilhelm Hofmann
5. Agnes Moors
6. Bertram Gawronski
7. Klaus Fiedler
8. Manfred J. Schmitt

Citations in the corpus

• Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) (2006, methodology): “If neutral stimuli shift the distribution of all IAT scores towards smaller values, whereas stereotypical and value-laden stimuli cause an upward shift towards large values (cf. Bluemke & Friese, 2006), this must be attributed to the stimuli rather than the respondents.”
• Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. (2009, background): “…by the attitudes and stereotypes concerning the categories (e.g., “Black person,” “White person”; De Houwer, 2001) but also by the individual stimuli used to represent the categories (e.g., a particular Black or White face; Bluemke & Friese, 2006; Govan & Williams, 2004; Mitchell et al., 2003).”
• When and why do implicit measures predict behaviour? Empirical evidence for the moderating role of opportunity, motivation, and process reliance (2008, background): “On the other hand, several studies show that implicit measures are sensitive to changes in context (e.g., Blair, 2002), procedural elements (e.g., Bluemke & Friese, 2006), and need states (Seibt, Häfner, & Deutsch, 2007).”
• Development of Indirect Measures of Conscientiousness: Combining a Facets Approach and Network Analysis (2015, unknown): “…into account industriousness and impulse control.3 It has been shown that the choice of particular stimuli can substantially influence the IAT effect (Bluemke & Friese, 2006; Govan & Williams, 2004), suggesting that the mixed results could be due to the fact that these researchers assessed…”
• Reliability and validity of the Single‐Target IAT (ST‐IAT): assessing automatic affect towards multiple attitude objects (2008, methodology): “This method is similar to Greenwald et al.’s (2003) D-algorithm save for the treatment of error penalties and training trials in the calculation of means and standard deviations (Bluemke & Friese, 2006).”
• Implicit consumer preferences and their influence on product choice (2006, background): “Second, it should be mentioned that the stimuli and not only the chosen categories might also have an influence on IAT scores (e.g., Bluemke & Friese, 2006; Steffens & Plewe, 2001).”