2010Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie)Requires access

It’s Brief But Is It Better? An Evaluation of the Brief Implicit Association Test

Klaus Rothermund, Dirk Wentura

Open publisher page 21 citations

Abstract

Sriram and Greenwald (2009) introduced a new variant of the Implicit Association Test, which they termed the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT). The BIAT differs from a standard IAT by using less trials and by instructing participants to focus on only two of the four categories in each block. We argue that the focus manipulation of the BIAT does not suffice to fully control for focusing and recoding processes in the task. Compatibility effects in the BIAT are therefore still subject to influences that are unrelated to the conceptual relation between the target and attribute categories of the task (e.g., salience asymmetries and stimulus-based effects). Highlighting these nonassociative influences, findings with the BIAT revealed strong asymmetries in compatibility effects, reliability, and convergent validity, depending on which of the two attribute categories was selected as a focal category in the BIAT. To eliminate these problems, we recommend the use of other, recently developed variants of the IAT that prevent recoding effects by eliminating the dual-block structure of the task.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Sriram and Greenwald (2009) introduced a new variant of the Implicit Association Test, which they termed the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT). The BIAT differs from a standard IAT by using less trials and by instructing participants to focus on only two of the four categories in each block. We argue that the focus manipulation of the BIAT does not suffice to fully control for focusing and recoding processes in the task. Compatibility effects in the BIAT are therefore still subject to influences that are unrelated to the conceptual relation between the target and attribute categories of the task (e.g., salience asymmetries and stimulus-based effects). Highlighting these nonassociative influences, findings with the BIAT revealed strong asymmetries in compatibility effects, reliability, and convergent validity, depending on which of the two attribute categories was selected as a focal category in the BIAT. To eliminate these problems, we recommend the use of other, recently developed variants of the IAT that prevent recoding effects by eliminating the dual-block structure of the task.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Sriram and Greenwald (2009) introduced a new variant of the Implicit Association Test, which they termed the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT). The BIAT differs from a standard IAT by using less trials and by instructing participants to focus on only two of the four categories in each block. We argue that the focus manipulation of the BIAT does not suffice to fully control for focusing and recoding processes in the task. Compatibility effects in the BIAT are therefore still subject to influences that are unrelated to the conceptual relation between the target and attribute categories of the task (e.g., salience asymmetries and stimulus-based effects). Highlighting these nonassociative influences, findings with the BIAT revealed strong asymmetries in compatibility effects, reliability, and convergent validity, depending on which of the two attribute categories was selected as a focal category in the BIAT. To eliminate these problems, we recommend the use of other, recently developed variants of the IAT that prevent recoding effects by eliminating the dual-block structure of the task.

Key concepts: Implicit-association test, Psychology, Cognitive psychology, Implicit attitude, Salience (neuroscience), Association (psychology), Social psychology, Psychotherapist

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
It’s Brief But Is It Better? An Evaluation of the Brief Implicit Association Test — Research Paper | ScholarLens