In six experiments (N = 2,424), we tested whether group affiliation has a stronger influence on the automatic evaluation of close friends than on nonautomatic evaluation. In Experiments 1 to 5, women showed a stronger pro-women preference in their evaluation of close friends when measured with supposed measures of automatic evaluation (the Implicit Association Test [IAT] and the Sorting Paired Features task) than with a self-report measure. The IAT (but not the self-reported preference) was related to a difference in how close and deep participants perceived the relationship to be (Experiments 3 and 4), but not to self-reported gender identity (Experiment 5). The IAT/self-report discrepancy was the same toward acquaintances and close friends (Experiment 4). We conceptually replicated the discrepancy finding with friends from the ethnic or racial in-group versus out-group (Experiment 6). Our results suggest that even toward highly familiar individuals, people’s automatic in-group preference is stronger than their nonautomatic in-group preference.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
2.
AxtJ. R.Bar-AnanY.VianelloM. (2020). The relation between evaluation and racial categorization of emotional faces. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11, 196–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619848000
3.
AxtJ. R.EbersoleC. R.NosekB. A. (2014). The rules of implicit evaluation by race, religion, and age. Psychological Science, 25(9), 1804–1815. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614543801
4.
AxtJ. R.FengT. Y.Bar-AnanY. (2021). The good and the bad: Are some attribute words better than others in the Implicit Association Test?Behavior Research Methods, 53, 2512–2527. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01592-8
5.
BanajiM. R.BhaskarR. (2000). Implicit stereotypes and memory: The bounded rationality of social beliefs. In SchacterD. L.ScarryE. (Eds.), Memory, brain, and belief. Harvard University Press.
6.
BarghJ. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, efficiency, intentions and control. In WyerR.SrullT. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (p. 1040). Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Bar-AnanY.NosekB. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 668–688. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0410-6
8.
Bar-AnanY.NosekB. A.VianelloM. (2009). The sorting paired features task: A measure of association strengths. Experimental Psychology, 56(5), 329–343. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.56.5.329
9.
Bar-AnanY.VianelloM. (2018). A multi-method multi-trait test of the dual-attitude perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1264–1272. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000383
10.
BrewerM. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In SrullT. K.WyerR. S.Jr. (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 1). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
CaoJ.BanajiM. R. (2016). The base rate principle and the fairness principle in social judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(27), 7475–7480. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1524268113
De HouwerJ. (2014). A propositional model of implicit evaluation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 342–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12111
15.
De HouwerJ. (2018). Propositional models of evaluative conditioning. Social Psychological Bulletin, 13(3), 1–21.
16.
De HouwerJ.Van DesselP.MoranT. (2021). Attitudes as propositional representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25, 870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.003
17.
DevineP. G.PlantE. A.AmodioD. M.Harmon-JonesE.VanceS. L. (2002). The regulation of explicit and implicit race bias: The role of motivations to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 835–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.83
18.
DovidioJ. F.EvansN.TylerR. B. (1986). Racial stereotypes: The contents of their cognitive representations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(1), 22–37.
19.
EaglyA.MladinicA. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgments of competence. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779543000002
20.
FalbénJ. K.OlivierJ. L.GolubickisM.HoN. S. P.PerssonL. M.TsamadiD.MarinopoulouE.BianciardiB.CunninghamW. A.MacraeC. N. (2019). Stop stereotyping. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 1228–1235. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01733-4
21.
FazioR. H.JacksonJ. R.DuntonB. C.WilliamsC. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1013–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1013
22.
FiskeS. T.NeubergS. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In OlsonJ. M. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). Elsevier.
23.
GlickP.FiskeS.MladinicA.SaizJ.AbramsD.MasserB.AdetounB.OsagieJ. E.AkandeA.AlaoA.BrunnerA.WillemsenT. M.ChipetaK.DardenneB.DijksterhuisA.WigboldusD.EckesT.Six-MaternaI.ExpósitoF.MoyaM.. . . LopezW. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763
24.
GawronskiB. (2019). Six lessons for a cogent science of implicit bias and its criticism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(4), 574–595. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619826015
25.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692
26.
GreenwaldA. G.BrendlM.CaiH.CvencekD.DovidioJ. F.FrieseM.HahnA.HehmanE.HofmannW.HughesS.HusseyI.JordanC.KirbyT. A.LaiC. K.LangJ. W. B.LindgrenK. P.MaisonD.OstafinB. D.RaeJ. R.. . . WiersR. W. (2022). Best research practices for using the Implicit Association Test. Behavior Research Methods, 55, 1161–1180. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01624-3
27.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.
28.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
29.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
30.
ItoT. A.UrlandG. R. (2003). Race and gender on the brain: Electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 616–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.616
31.
ItoT. A.UrlandG. R. (2005). The influence of processing objectives on the perception of faces: An ERP study of race and gender perception. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.5.1.21
32.
KundaZ.SpencerS. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 522–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.522
33.
KurdiB.BanajiM. R. (2017). Repeated evaluative pairings and evaluative statements: How effectively do they shift implicit attitudes?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(2), 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000239
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 93–120.
36.
MacraeC. N.MilneA. B.BodenhausenG. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 37.
37.
MannT. C.FergusonM. J. (2015). Can we undo our first impressions? The role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 823–849. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000021
38.
MoorsA.De HouwerJ. (2006). Automaticity: a theoretical and conceptual analysis. Psychological bulletin, 132(2), 297–326.
39.
MoskowitzG. B.GollwitzerP. M.WaselW.SchaalB. (1999). Preconscious control of stereotype activation through chronic egalitarian goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 167–184.
40.
Mouchetant-RostaingY.GiardM. H. (2003). Electrophysiological correlates of age and gender perception on human faces. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(6), 900–910.
41.
NavonM.Bar-AnanY. (2023). Is the automatic evaluation of individual group members inherently biased by their group membership?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 108, 104491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2023.104491
42.
NavonM.Bar-AnanY. (2025). The effects of group affiliation versus individuating information on direct and indirect measures of the evaluation of novel individual group members. Psychological Science, 36(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251315689
43.
NavonM.ShechterA.Bar-AnanY. (2021). The effect of group membership and individuating information on automatic and deliberate evaluation of well-known people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121, 498–523. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000275
44.
PayneB. K.BurkleyM. A.StokesM. B. (2008). Why do implicit and explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.16
45.
QuinnK. A.MasonM. F.MacraeC. N. (2010). When Arnold is “the terminator,” we no longer see him as a man: The temporal determinants of person perception. Experimental Psychology, 57(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000004
46.
RichesonJ. A.AmbadyN. (2001). Who’s in charge? Effects of situational roles on automatic gender bias. Sex Roles, 44, 493–512.
47.
RubinsteinR. S.JussimL.StevensS. T. (2018). Reliance on individuating information and stereotypes in implicit and explicit person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.009
48.
RudmanL. A.GoodwinS. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(4), 494–509.
49.
RoseS. M. (1985). Same-and cross-sex friendships and the psychology of homosociality. Sex Roles, 12, 63–74.
50.
SapadinL. A. (1988). Friendship and gender: Perspectives of professional men and women. Journal of Social and personal Relationships, 5(4), 387–403.
51.
SmithE. R.DeCosterJ. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 108–131.
52.
SmithC. T.De HouwerJ.NosekB. A. (2013). Consider the source: Persuasion of implicit evaluations is moderated by source credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212472374
53.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33, 33–47.
54.
ThibaultJ.WalkerL. (1975). Procedural justice: A social psychological analysis. Lawrence Elbaum Associates.
55.
Van DesselP.RatliffK.BrannonS. M.GawronskiB.De HouwerJ. (2021). Illusory-correlation effects on implicit and explicit evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(10), 1480–1494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220977706
56.
VianelloM.Bar-AnanY. (2021). Can the implicit association test measure automatic judgment? The validation continues. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(2), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619897960
57.
VillepouxA.VermeulenN.NiedenthalP.MermillodM. (2015). Evidence of fast and automatic gender bias in affective priming. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2014.1000919
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
