Predicting Spontaneous Big Five Behavior with Implicit Association Tests

179 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Reliability and validity of the Single‐Target IAT (ST‐IAT): assessing automatic affect towards multiple attitude objects (2008, background): “The ST-IAT’s strength of efficiently assessing several single-target evaluations would then be constricted by severe disadvantages, either because of response strategies, fatigue effects or specific carry-over effects (Nosek et al., 2006; Steffens & Schulze-König, 2006).”
Development of Indirect Measures of Conscientiousness: Combining a Facets Approach and Network Analysis (2015, methodology): “In terms of predictive validity, personality IATs can perform better in the prediction of spontaneous and objective behaviours than self-reported behaviours (Asendorpf et al., 2002; Egloff & Schmukle, 2002; Perugini & Leone, 2009; Steffens & König, 2006).”
Integrating Implicit and Explicit Social Cognitions for Enhanced Personality Assessment (2007, background): “…such as racial biases (Arkes & Tetlock, 2004), although several new tests seek to assess implicit components of personality, including the Big Five (Steffens & Konig, 2006), anxiety (Egloff, Schwerdtfeger, & Schmukle, 2005), achievement motivation (Brunstein & Schmitt, 2004), and self-esteem…”