Related Experiment Videos
Consequential validity of the implicit association test: comment on Blanton and Jaccard (2006)
Anthony G Greenwald1, Brian A Nosek, N Sriram
1Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-1525, USA. agg@u.washington.edu
The American Psychologist
|January 27, 2006
Summary
The Implicit Association Test (IAT) quickly gains consequential validity due to its design, supported by extensive research. Despite criticism, the IAT demonstrates robust validity in psychological measurement.
Area of Science:
- Psychological Measurement
- Social Psychology
- Psychometrics
Background:
- Psychological measures often lack inherent meaning until validated.
- Consequential validity, or metric meaningfulness, is crucial for interpreting numeric values.
- Some measures, like signal detection theory's sensitivity, acquire meaning readily, while others, like self-report measures, do not.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the consequential validity of the Implicit Association Test (IAT).
- To address criticisms regarding the IAT's metric meaningfulness.
- To explore the reasons behind the scholarly attention and criticism directed at the IAT.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of over 250 publications on the IAT since 1998.
- Examination of the IAT's design properties in relation to consequential validity.
- Comparison of the IAT with other psychological measures regarding validity acquisition.
Main Results:
- The IAT possesses design characteristics that facilitate rapid acquisition of consequential validity.
- Substantial evidence supports the consequential validity of the IAT.
- The IAT has faced more scholarly criticism compared to similar psychological measures.
Conclusions:
- The IAT is predisposed to acquire consequential validity, contrary to some characterizations.
- The extensive body of research on the IAT provides significant evidence of its validity.
- The authors suggest further exploration into the reasons for the IAT's prominence in scholarly debate.