Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
One pragmatic goal of implicit tools like the Implicit Association Tests (IAT) is to rule out self-presentation and controlled responding. Three experiments examined whether the IAT meets this goal, using Turkish and German groups along with positive and negative traits. Experiment 1 was an Internet study. After completing a naïve IAT pretest, participants were instructed to fake on a posttest in 3 graded conditions that differed in the explicitness of faking instructions. Experiment 2 replicated and extended the approach in the laboratory, including a no-pretest condition. Results demonstrate that participants who intended to fake were successful, provided the experience of a pretest. Experiment 3 ruled out an alternative account of faking in terms of pretest experience. Faking was mostly due to slow-down on compatible trials, but a notable speed-up on incompatible trials also occurred. Faking remained inconspicuous, especially with nonblatant instructions; experts failed to identify faked data sets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fiedler et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: