TARGET ARTICLE: Attributions of Implicit Prejudice, or "Would Jesse Jackson 'Fail' the Implicit Association Test?"

By Hal R. Arkes, Philip Tetlock. 2004

220 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/792aa11ef4c866e4842041995faeaad115095dd8

How researchers see this paper

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

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Unconscious Racism: A Concept in Pursuit of a Measure (2008, background): “More enduring trait differences were suggested by Arkes & Tetlock (2004), who created a thought experiment that they termed the parable of the two Jesses.”
A History of Implicit Social Cognition Where Is It Coming From? Where Is It Now? Where Is It Going? (2010, background): “A thornier aspect of this debate is whether people who show negative automatic associations with ethnic groups should be considered prejudiced (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004; Banaji, Nosek, & Greenwald, 2004).”
Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election (2010, unknown): “Critics of this research, however, have questioned whether performance on implicit tests really reflects prejudice at all (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004; Tetlock & Mitchell, 2008).”
Field Experiments on Discrimination (2016, background): “So do IATs really identify prejudice or just some raw psychological “material” that we then transform? What does it mean for someone to feel that there are not prejudiced against Blacks but have their IAT showing automatic white preferences (Arkes and Tetlock, 2004)? On this last question, Banaji, N”
Implicit affect in organizations (2009, background): “9 It should be noted that while there has been much research using this paradigm, it is not without its theoretical and methodological critics (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004; and see Jost et al., in press; Tetlock & Mitchell, in press for a debate about this paradigm). measure of individual differences in…”
Implicit Stereotypes: Evidence from Teachers’ Gender Bias* (2019, background): “Finally, some papers in social psychology argue that “the data may reflect shared cultural stereotypes rather than personal animus” (Arkes and Tetlock, 2004).”
Discrimination in the Age of Algorithms (2018, background): “The societal consequences of implicit bias remain difficult to determine, partly because we only have IAT results for convenient (rather than truly representative) samples of respondent (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004).”
On the epistemic costs of implicit bias (2011, background): “And if one’s goal is the reduction of crime, this distributional information has—as Arkes and Tetlock (2004), following Farmer and Terrell (2001) contend—rather striking practical implications:”
Market Signals: Evidence on the Determinants and Consequences of School Choice From a Citywide Lottery (2016, unknown): “Even carefully worded surveys might not elicit the desired information because choosers may not be fully conscious of all the preferences and biases that Market Signals guide their own decisions (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004; Nosek et al., 2007; Quillian, 2008).”