When Do Associations Matter? The Use of Automatic Associations toward Ethnic Groups in Person Judgments ☆

By Arnd Florack, Martin Scarabis, H. Bless. 2001

94 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f5d8dc9eb1c29fac686f37e5cca8a0c7c9e863ae

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 Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The Relationship Between Religious Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, and Implicit Sexual Prejudice (2007, background): “Implicit prejudices have also been shown to manifest themselves in behavior ( Chugh, 2004 ; Florack, Scarabis, & Bless, 2001 ; Rudman & Glick, 2001 ).”
Decoding the implicit association test: Implications for criterion prediction (2006, background): “It might be argued that our concerns regarding measurement and causal models are allayed by evidence that the IAT and other implicit measures often are predictive of meaningful criteria (e.g., Asendorpf, Banse, & Muecke, 2002 Florack, Scarabis, & Bless,2001; Florack et al., 2001; Hugenberg & Boden”
Reducing prejudice via direct and extended cross-group friendship (2007, result): “We also found that in Study 2, but not Studies 1 and 3, implicit and explicit attitudes were significantly correlated with one another; the overt intergroup conflict in this study may have legitimised the expression of negative explicit outgroup attitudes, increasing the association with implicit at”
Societal and Managerial Implications of Implicit Social Cognition: Why Milliseconds Matter (2004, background): “Florack et al. (2001) considered another possible moderator in the relationship between implicit bias and decision-making: the decision-maker’s tendency to engage in deliberative cognitive processing, or need for cognition (Cacioppo et al., 1996).”
Implicit measures in social cognition. research: their meaning and use. (2003, result): “Florack et al. (2001) observed a moderating influence of need for cognition on the relation between an IAT reflecting favorability toward Turks, relative to Germans, and subsequent judgments of a Turkish juvenile delinquent.”
Unraveling the Processes Underlying Evaluation: Attitudes from the Perspective of the Ape Model (2007, background): “…evaluations on evaluative judgments seems to depend on several factors that can be directly derived from the APE Model, such as, for example, the degree of cognitive elaboration in the course of making an evaluative judgment (e.g., Florack et al., 2001; Hofmann et al., 2005; Koole et al., 2001).”
Exclusionary reactions to foreign cultures: Effects of simultaneous exposure to cultures in globalized space (2011, background): “…automatic associations toward an ethnic minority and explicit judgment of the ethnic group decreases as need for cognition increases (Florack, Scarabis & Bless, 2001), suggesting that individuals high (vs. low) in need for cognition can more effectively correct their spontaneous impression…”
When and why do implicit measures predict behaviour? Empirical evidence for the moderating role of opportunity, motivation, and process reliance (2008, methodology): “Also, Conner et al. (2007) used the English version of the scale while Florack et al. (2001) drew on the German version (Bless et al., 1994).”