Using ConJoint AnAlysis to deteCt disCriminAtion: reveAling Covert PreferenCes from overt ChoiCes

By Eugene M. Caruso, Dobromir Rahnev, Mahzarin R. Banaji. 2009

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

In an effort to continue the development of methods to understand social cognition, we adopt a technique called conjoint analysis that mathematically deduces preferences from the implied tradeoffs people make when choosing between sets of attributes at varying levels. We asked 101 students to make a series of choices between prospective teammates in a trivia contest who varied on three dimensions relevant to the decisions (education, IQ, experience) and one dimension that was irrelevant (body weight). Although participants stated explicitly that weight had little impact on their decisions, weight actually accounted for more than 25% of the variance in their revealed preferences. Additional analyses demonstrated that participants gave up about 11 IQ points to have a thin rather than overweight teammate. We suggest that conjoint analysis can be a valuable tool for detecting and quantifying the social costs of covert attitudes that are not in sync with overt values.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/78a9221b11b459689ad1289c932ff8bbdf4b67b1

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 Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Implicit race attitudes predict trustworthiness judgments and economic trust decisions (2011, background): “Implicit mental processes, expected to operate relatively automatically and without awareness, can also be oppositional to our intended goals (12, 13).”