Task-Set Inertia,Attitude Accessibility,and Compatibility-Order Effects: New Evidence for a Task-Set Switching Account of the Implicit Association Test Effect
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2005
Task-Set Inertia,Attitude Accessibility,and Compatibility-Order Effects: New Evidence for a Task-Set Switching Account of the Implicit Association Test Effect
Based on a task-set switching account of the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the authors predict a specific pattern of aftereffects as a consequence of working through IAT blocks. In Study 1, performance in an evaluative decision task, but not in a color-naming task, was decreased after working through the incompatible rather than compatible block of a flower-insect IAT. In Study 2, response latencies in an evaluative rating task, but not in a color-rating task, were analogously affected, whereas the ratings themselves were not a function of the compatibility of prior IAT blocks. The aftereffects demonstrate reactivity of the IAT; they bear on the mechanisms underlying the IAT and on compatibility-order effects.
Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV (pp. 421-452). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Asendorpf, J. B., Banse, R., & Mücke, D. (2002). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit personality self-concept: The case of shy behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 380-393.
3.
Blair, I. V., Ma, J. E., & Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 828-841.
4.
Bosson, J. K., Swann, W. B., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 631-643.
5.
Brendl, C. M., Markman, A. B., & Messner, C. (2001). How do indirect measures of evaluation work? Evaluating the inference of prejudice in the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 760-773.
6.
Celex. (1995). The Celex lexical database, Release 2. Nijmegen: Center for Lexical Information.
7.
Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 800-814.
8.
De Houwer, J. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 443-451.
9.
De Houwer, J., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2001). Stimulus-feature specific negative priming. Memory & Cognition, 29, 931-939.
10.
Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2002). Predictive validity of an implicit association test for assessing anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1441-1455.
11.
Fazio, R. H. (1989). On the power and functionality of attitudes: The role of attitude accessibility. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 153-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Fazio, R. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R.E. Petty & J.A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247-283). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297-327.
14.
Fox, E. (1995). Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 145-173.
15.
Goschke, T. (2000). Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention & performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 333-355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000). Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022-1038.
17.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
18.
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: 1. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197-216.
19.
Karpinski, A., & Hilton, J. L. (2001). Attitudes and the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 774-788.
20.
Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1990). Designing experiments and analysing data: A model comparison perspective. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth.
21.
Mayr, U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology and Aging, 16, 96-109.
22.
Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4-26.
23.
Mayr, U., & Liebscher, T. (2001). Is there an age deficit in the selection of mental sets?European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13, 47-69.
24.
McFarland, S. G., & Crouch, Z. (2002). A cognitive skill confound on the Implicit Association Test. Social Cognition, 20, 481-506.
25.
Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
26.
Meiran, N. (2000). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
27.
Mierke, J., & Klauer, K. C. (2001). Implicit association measurement with the IAT: Evidence for effects of executive control processes. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 107-122.
28.
Mierke, J., & Klauer, K. C. (2003). Method-specific variance in the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1180-1192.
29.
Mitchell, J.P., Nosek, B.A., & Banaji, M.R. (in press). Contextual variations in implicit evaluations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
30.
Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Methodological issues. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia at Charlottesville.
31.
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95, 385-408.
32.
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
33.
Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2001). Figure-ground asymmetries in the implicit association test (IAT). Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 94-106.
34.
Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (in press). Underlying processes in the Implicit Association Test (IAT): Dissociating salience from associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
35.
Steffens, M. C., & Buchner, A. (2003). Implicit association test: Separating transsituationally stable and variable components of attitudes toward gay men. Experimental Psychology, 50, 33-48.
36.
Wylie, G., & Allport, A. (2000). Task switching and the measurement of “switch costs.”Psychological Research, 63, 212-233.
