Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In reporting Implicit Association Test (IAT) results, researchers have most often used scoring conventions described in the first publication of the IAT (A.G. Greenwald, D.E. McGhee, & J.L.K. Schwartz, 1998). Demonstration IATs available on the Internet have produced large data sets that were used in the current article to evaluate alternative scoring procedures. Candidate new algorithms were examined in terms of their (a) correlations with parallel self-report measures, (b) resistance to an artifact associated with speed of responding, (c) internal consistency, (d) sensitivity to known influences on IAT measures, and (e) resistance to known procedural influences. The best-performing measure incorporates data from the IAT's practice trials, uses a metric that is calibrated by each respondent's latency variability, and includes a latency penalty for errors. This new algorithm strongly outperforms the earlier (conventional) procedure.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Anthony G. Greenwald
Educational Testing Service
Brian A. Nosek
University of Notre Dame
Mahzarin R. Banaji
Dartmouth College
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
University of Washington
University of Virginia
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Greenwald et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69d861a9d2f7327e70ae3229 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197