Sources of Implicit Attitudes

By Laurie A. Rudman. 2004

482 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dddf4fc0da527c82f2d52087b000d6aecd382435

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Gender Stereotypes in the Family Context: Mothers, Fathers, and Siblings (2013, background): “…that implicit stereotypes are better predictors of behavior than explicit self-reported stereotypes (Nosek et al., 2002a, 2002b; Nosek et al., 2005; Rudman, 2004), because explicit reports may be biased by social desirability and a lack of awareness of own stereotypes (Kunda & Spencer, 2003, White…”
Discrimination and the Implicit Association Test (2007, background): “Implicit biases are simply automatic (over-learned) evaluations; while they may refl ect hostility, they also stem from many other infl uences (Rudman, 2004), including a natural proclivity for partisanship (Greenwald et al., 2002).”
Affective Focus Increases the Concordance Between Implicit and Explicit Attitudes (2011, background): “Additionally, a study that evidenced a reduction in antiblack implicit bias following a course in diversity education (Rudman, 2004; Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001) suggested that changes observed in implicit attitudes may have been primarily driven by shifts in affective variables such as increased ”
Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: an integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. (2006, background): “their roots in long-term socialization experiences (e.g., Dovidio, Kawakami, & Beach, 2001; Petty et al., 2006; Rudman, 2004; Wilson et al., 2000), implicit attitudes should generally be more robust than explicit attitudes.”
The Associative–Propositional Evaluation Model: Theory, Evidence, and Open Questions (2011, background): “A common assumption in the attitude literature is that implicit evaluations are the product of highly robust representations that have their roots in longterm socialization experiences (e.g., Rudman, 2004; Wilson et al., 2000).”
Associations Between Religious Personality Dimensions and Implicit Homosexual Prejudice. (2006, background): “Early life experiences, affectively charged incidents, and one's cultural milieu are possible sources of implicit attitudes (Rudman 2004).”
Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. (2005, background): “One approach is to identify factors that differentially influence implicit and explicit attitude formation (Rudman, 2004).”
Exposure to Racial Out-Groups and Implicit Race Bias in the United States (2015, background): “Implicit bias is sensitive to environmental cues, such as societal evaluations of social groups (Newheiser & Olson, 2014; Rudman, 2004), which likely explains the overall pattern of higher implicit in-group bias among White (higher status group) relative to Black (lower status group) respondents.”
Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination: Theoretical and empirical overview (2010, background): “…and stereotypes that have been ‘overwritten’ by newer, explicit forms of bias or incompletely replaced by individuals who strive for egalitarian beliefs (Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000), or reflecting different aspects of attitudes, such as affective and cognitive components (Rudman, 2004).”
Automatic emotion regulation (2005, background): “We believe that such instances of AER are pervasive in individuals’ lives, because overlearned habits, regulatory strategies learned early in childhood, sociocultural norms, and implicit hedonic goals all engender automatic regulatory processes (e.g., Aarts & Dijksterhuis, 2000; Adams & Markus, 2004”
The associations in our heads belong to us: Searching for attitudes and knowledge in implicit evaluation (2008, background): “Also, theories abound concerning the presumed origins and consequences of implicit attitudes that exist outside of awareness or control (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; Rudman, 2004; Wilson et al., 2000).”
Proxemic behaviors as predictors of aggression towards Black (but not White) males in an immersive virtual environment (2009, background): “…to predict the explicit expression of bias in contexts in which individuals lack the motivation or resources to control responses (Dasgupta, 2004; Rudman, 2004), it seems likely that subtly discriminatory nonverbal behavior might predict more aggressive discriminatory behaviors in a high-stress…”
The social neuroscience of intergroup relations (2008, background): “First, implicit biases are believed to reflect a lifetime of exposure to racially biased information in one’s cultural environment (Devine, 1989; Rudman, 2002).”
IS BEAUTIFUL ALWAYS GOOD? IMPLICIT BENEFITS OF FACIAL ATTRACTIVENESS (2004, background): “Through positive emotional conditioning (Rudman, 2004), infants (both male and female) form stronger maternal than paternal bonds (Montague & Walker–Andrews, 2002), bonds that may shape their gender–based attitudes and responses to male and female targets in later life (i.”
Unraveling the Processes Underlying Evaluation: Attitudes from the Perspective of the Ape Model (2007, background): “…AND PROPOSITIONAL PROCESSES Originally, indirect measures were assumed to assess highly robust evaluative representations that have their roots in long–term socialization experiences (e.g., Dovidio, Kawakami, & Beach, 2001; Petty, Tormala, Briñol, & Jarvis, 2006; Rudman, 2004; Wilson et al., 2000).”