Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept.

By A. Greenwald, Shelly Diane Farnham. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000

1,154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f154d0e208366d3cc6546722406ef94ef33c2fc5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. (2002, background): “Yet there is growing evidence to suggest that explicit and implicit measures can be positively and significantly correlated while remaining separate factors (Cunningham et al., 2001; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000 ).”
“How much do you like your name?” An implicit measure of global self-esteem (2008, methodology): “Study 6 Explicit measures of self-esteem have been shown to relate the impression management component of socially desirable responding in particular (e.g., Greenwald & Farnham, 2000; Riketta, 2004).”
Development and initial validation of an implicit measure of humility relative to arrogance (2006, methodology): “The Humility–Arrogance IAT used in Studies 1 and 2 (see Table I) was patterned after existing validated measures of implicit self-esteem (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) and implicit shyness (Asendorpf, Banse, & Mucke, 2002), and was grounded in the same theory as other established measures of implicit…”
Affective Focus Increases the Concordance Between Implicit and Explicit Attitudes (2011, background): “…Publishing Social Psychology 2011; Vol. 42(4):300–313 The selection of targets and attributes is, of course, critical to interpreting any effects that are elicited (e.g., Bluemke & Friese, 2006; Steffens & Plewe, 2001; for a review of this and other procedural issues pertaining to the use of…”
Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: the role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. (2004, methodology): “Participants first completed the Self-Esteem Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).”
The Extrinsic Affective Simon Task. (2003, background): “As pointed out by Greenwald and Farnham (2000), in”
Consumer Participation in Coproduction: “I Made it Myself” Effects on Consumers’ Sensory Perceptions and Evaluations of Outcome and Input Product (2012, background): “Given that most people hold positive evaluations of themselves (Bosson, Swann, and Pennebaker 2000; Gawronski, Bodenhausen, and Becker 2007; Greenwald and Farnham 2000), the theory predicts that new links between the self and an object lead to more positive evaluations of the object.”
Implicit attitudes towards native and non-native speaker teachers (2009, methodology): “The IAT has been used to investigate implicit attitudes towards a wide variety of topics, including age prejudices (e.g. Hummert et al., 2002), smoking (e.g. De Houwer et al., 2006), and self-esteem (e.g. Greenwald and Farnham, 2000).”
Getting Explicit About the Implicit (2012, background): “For example, if a researcher were trying to create an IAT to capture associations between self and leader versus follower, they might inadvertently be measuring implicit self-esteem if participants can sort the leader words from the follower words based on their valence (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).”
Mindfulness as a moderator of the effect of implicit motivational self-concept on day-to-day behavioral motivation (2007, methodology): “…day-to-day) outcome rather than on a one-occasion self-report where selfpresentation concerns and perceived social demands may be more salient (Asendorpf et al. 2002; Bosson et al. 2000; Greenwald and Farnham 2000; McClelland et al. 1989; see also Wilson et al. 2000 for a general discussion).”
Implicit measures in social cognition. research: their meaning and use. (2003, positive): “However, Greenwald & Farnham (2000) did obtain some evidence suggesting that an IAT-based measure of self-esteem predicted reactions to success versus failure experiences; individuals with higher scores on the implicit self-esteem measure tended to be less affected by the feedback.”
How to find what's in a name: Scrutinizing the optimality of five scoring algorithms for the name‐letter task (2009, methodology): “In this light, the name-liking task (Gebauer, Riketta, Broemer, & Maio, 2008) and the self-esteem IAT (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) may be useful tools to corroborate findings obtained with the NLT in the domain of ISE.”
The Authentic Personality: A Theoretical and Empirical Conceptualization and the Development of the Authenticity Scale (2008, background): “Although such traits as insincerity and secure self-esteem are difficult to measure, considerable advances have been made into measuring these traits through implicit measures (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).”
Gratitude and Subjective Wellbeing: A Proposal of Two Causal Frameworks (2017, methodology): “Using implicit self-esteem association tests (e.g., Greenwald and Farnham 2000) may therefore be a good alternative to use in future research.”
Narcissistic Fragility: Rethinking Its Links to Explicit and Implicit Self-esteem (2010, background): “Such signs include unstable self-esteem (Zeigler-Hill, 2006 ), verbal defensiveness (Kernis, Lakey, & Heppner, 2008 ), reactivity to threat (McGregor & Jordan, 2007 ), and cognitive reactions to success or failure (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000 ).”
Is the Implicit Association Test a Valid and Valuable Measure of Implicit Consumer Social Cognition (2004, methodology): “Ever since the early presentation of the IAT (Greenwald et al., 1998), researchers have claimed that IAT and self-report measures capture distinct but correlated constructs (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).”
Contemporary perspectives on the psychology of attitudes (2004, neutral): “…McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) has been specifically developed to measure implicit attitudes and used in several studies (e.g., Cunningham, Preacher, & Banaji, 2001; Dasgupta, McGhee, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2000; Greenwald, Banaji, Rudman, Farnham, Nosek, & Mellott, 2002; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).”
Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) (2006, neutral): “…are explicitly reported (cf. Bosson, Swann, & Pennebaker, 2000; Cunningham, Preacher, & Banaji, 2001; Egloff, Schwerdtfeger, & Schmukle, 2005; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000; Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, in press; Schmukle & Egloff, 2004), often treating the IAT as a unitary category, like a…”
I like it, because I like myself: Associative self-anchoring and post-decisional change of implicit evaluations (2007, background): “Given that most people’s implicit self-evaluation is highly positive (Bosson, Swann, & Pennebaker, 2000; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000; Koole, Dijksterhuis, & Van Knippenberg, 2001), this process of associative selfanchoring may lead to post-decisional enhancement of implicit evaluations of chosen…”