Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity

Eric Luis Uhlmann (1) , Anthony Greenwald (2) , Andrew Poehlmann (3) , Mahzarin Banaji (4)

1 Kellogg School of Management
2 Department of Psychology
3 Cox School of Management
4 Department of Psychology

This review of 122 research reports (184 independent samples, 14,900 subjects) found average r = .274 for prediction of behavioral, judgment, and physiological measures by Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures. Parallel explicit (i.e., self-report) measures, available in 156 of these samples (13,068 subjects), also predicted effectively (average r = .361), but with much greater variability of effect size. Predictive validity of self-report was impaired for socially sensitive topics, for which impression management may distort self-report responses. For 32 samples with criterion measures involving Black–White interracial behavior, predictive validity of IAT measures significantly exceeded that of self-report measures. Both IAT and self-report measures displayed incremental validity, with each measure predicting criterion variance beyond that predicted by the other. The more highly IAT and self-report measures were intercorrelated, the greater was the predictive validity of each.

Mots clés: Implicit Association Test; implicit measures; validity; implicit attitudes; attitude–behavior relations

Domaines: Management des ressources humaines

Eric Luis Uhlmann, Anthony Greenwald, Andrew Poehlmann, Mahzarin Banaji. Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2009, Vol.97, n°1, pp.17-41. ⟨10.1037/a0015575⟩. ⟨hal-00516146⟩