Related Experiment Videos
Does the compatibility effect in the race Implicit Association Test reflect familiarity or affect?
Sachiko Kinoshita1, Marie Peek-O'Leary
1Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia. sachiko@maccs.mq.edu.au
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
|October 21, 2005
Summary
The Implicit Association Test (IAT) may reflect familiarity, not implicit prejudice, in race evaluations. Greater familiarity with the white category, rather than bias, could explain IAT results.
Area of Science:
- Social Psychology
- Cognitive Psychology
- Psychological Measurement
Background:
- The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is widely used to measure implicit biases.
- Race-based IATs often show a compatibility effect favoring the "white" category.
- This effect is commonly interpreted as implicit racial prejudice.
Purpose of the Study:
- To re-evaluate the interpretation of the race IAT effect.
- To propose an alternative explanation based on category salience and familiarity.
- To critically examine evidence against the familiarity interpretation.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of existing Implicit Association Test (IAT) data and literature.
- Consideration of the salience asymmetry account (Rothermund & Wentura, 2004).
- Discussion of empirical evidence and alternative interpretations.
Main Results:
- The apparent "implicit prejudice" in race IATs may be better explained by familiarity.
- Greater familiarity with the "white" category increases its salience, influencing IAT performance.
- Existing evidence against the familiarity interpretation is re-examined.
Conclusions:
- The race IAT effect might not solely represent "implicit prejudice."
- Category salience, driven by familiarity, offers a plausible alternative explanation.
- Further research is needed to disentangle familiarity from genuine bias in IAT measures.