Automatic evaluation has emerged as a central concept in contemporary thinking about prejudice. The current research tested a quintessential aspect of prejudice: whether group affiliation dominates the automatic evaluation of individual group members even when diagnostic evaluative information about the individuals is available. Participants read a list of descriptions about the behaviors of two individuals: one from a typically liked group and one from a typically disliked group. The list portrayed one individual more positively than the other, and we manipulated the extremity and direction of that difference. We conducted six studies (N = 11,572) with samples consisting of U.S. adults across different regions and group types (age, gender, and race) and two indirect measures that purportedly measure automatic evaluation: the implicit association test (IAT) and the evaluative priming task (EPT). Group affiliation (relative to personal characteristics) influenced the IAT and the EPT more than it influenced the self-reported evaluation. These results may suggest that the automatic evaluation of individuals is more prejudiced than nonautomatic evaluation.
AsendorpfJ. B.BanseR.MückeD. (2002). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit personality self-concept: The case of shy behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 380–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.380
2.
AxtJ. R.Bar-AnanY.VianelloM. (2020). The relation between evaluation and racial categorization of emotional faces. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 11(2), 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.
BanajiM. R.BhaskarR. (2000). Implicit stereotypes and memory: The bounded rationality of social beliefs. In SchacterD. L.ScarryE. (Eds.), Memory, brain, and belief (pp. 139–175). Harvard University Press.
5.
BanajiM. R.GreenwaldA. G. (2013). Blindspot: Hidden biases of good people. Random House.
6.
Bar-AnanY.NosekB. A. (2012). Reporting intentional rating of the primes predicts priming effects in the affective misattribution procedure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1193–1207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212446835
7.
Bar-AnanY.NosekB. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 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.
BarghJ. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In WyerR. S.SrullR. S. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp. 1–40). Erlbaum.
10.
BrewerM. B.FeinsteinA. S. H. (1999). Dual processes in the cognitive representation of persons and social categories. In ChaikenS.TropeY. (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 255–270). Guilford Press.
11.
CameronC. D.Brown-IannuzziJ. L.PayneB. K. (2012). Sequential priming measures of implicit social cognition: A meta-analysis of associations with behavior and explicit attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(4), 330–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312440047
12.
CaoJ.BanajiM. R. (2016). The base rate principle and the fairness principle in social judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 113(27), 7475–7480. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1524268113
ConeJ.MannT. C.FergusonM. J. (2017). Changing our implicit minds: How, when, and why implicit evaluations can be rapidly revised. In OlsonJ. M. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 56, pp. 131–199). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.03.001
DasguptaN.McGheeD. E.GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (2000). Automatic preference for White Americans: Eliminating the familiarity explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(3), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1418
De HouwerJ. (2014). A propositional model of implicit evaluation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(7), 342–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12111
19.
De HouwerJ.Van DesselP.MoranT. (2021). Attitudes as propositional representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(10), 870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.003
20.
DeStenoD.DasguptaN.BartlettM. Y.CajdricA. (2004). Prejudice from Thin Air: The effect of emotion on automatic intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 15(5), 319–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00676.x
21.
DevineP. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5–18.
22.
DevineP. G.MonteithM. J.ZuwerinkJ. R.ElliotA. J. (1991). Prejudice with and without compunction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.817
23.
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(5), 835–848. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.5.835
24.
DevineP. G.SharpL. B. (2009). Automaticity and control in stereotyping and prejudice. In NelsonT. D. (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 61–82). Psychology Press.
25.
DunhamY.BaronA. S.BanajiM. R. (2016). The development of implicit gender attitudes. Developmental Science, 19(5), 781–789. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12321
26.
EaglyA. H.ChaikenS. (1998). Attitude structure and function. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 269–322). McGraw Hill.
27.
EbnerN. C.RiedigerM.LindenbergerU. (2010). FACES—A database of facial expressions in young, middle-aged, and older women and men: Development and validation. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 351–362. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.1.351
28.
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
29.
FazioR. H.SanbonmatsuD. M.PowellM. C.KardesF. R. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 229–238.
30.
FiskeS. T.LinM. H.NeubergS. L. (1999). The continuum model: Ten years later. In ChaikenS.TropeY. (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 231–54). Guilford Press.
31.
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.
32.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2011). The associative–propositional evaluation model: Theory, evidence, and open questions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 59–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385522-0.00002-0
33.
GawronskiB.CorneilleO. (2025). Unawareness of attitudes, their environmental causes, and their behavioral effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 76, 359–384. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-051324-031037
34.
GladwellM. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. Little, Brown and Co.
35.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4
36.
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
37.
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
38.
HardinC. D.BanajiM. R. (2013). The nature of implicit prejudice: Implications for personal and public policy. In ShafirE. (Ed.), The behavioral foundations of public policy (pp. 13–30). Princeton University Press.
39.
HermansD.CrombezG.EelenP. (2000). Automatic attitude activation and efficiency: The fourth horseman of automaticity. Psychologica Belgica, 40(1), 3–22.
40.
KimD.-Y. (2003). Voluntary controllability of the implicit association test (IAT). Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(1), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090143
41.
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
42.
KurdiB.BanajiM. R. (2022). Implicit social cognition: A brief (and gentle) introduction. In ReberA. S.AllenR. (Eds.), The cognitive unconscious: The first half-century (pp. 323–346). Oxford University Press.
43.
LivingstonR. W.BrewerM. B. (2002). What are we really priming? Cue-based versus category-based processing of facial stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.5
MierkeJ.KlauerK. C. (2003). Method-specific variance in the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(6), 1180–1192. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1180
NavonM.Bar-AnanY. (2023). Is the automatic evaluation of individual group members inherently biased by their group membership?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 108, Article 104491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2023.104491
48.
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(3), 498–523. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000275
49.
NosekB. A. (2005). Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134(4), 565–584. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.565
50.
NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (2007). The implicit association test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In BarghJ. A. (Ed.), Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265–292). Psychology Press.
51.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L.HansenJ. J.DevosT.LindnerN. M.RanganathK. A.SmithC. T.OlsonK. R.ChughD.GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18(1), 36–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280701489053
52.
OlsonM. A.FazioR. H. (2004). Reducing the influence of extrapersonal associations on the implicit association test: Personalizing the IAT. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 653–667. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.653
53.
OttawayS. A.HaydenD. C.OakesM. A. (2001). Implicit attitudes and racism: Effects of word familiarity and frequency on the implicit association test. Social Cognition, 19, 97–144. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.19.2.97.20706
54.
PayneB. K. (2001). Prejudice and perception: The role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(2), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.181
55.
PlantE. A.DevineP. G. (1998). Internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 811–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.811
RatliffK. A.NosekB. A. (2011). Negativity and outgroup biases in attitude formation and transfer. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(12), 1692–1703. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211420168
58.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
59.
RubinsteinR. S.JussimL. (2019). Stimulus pairing and statement target information have equal effects on stereotype-relevant evaluations of individuals. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 3(4), 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.53
60.
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
61.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.494
62.
SchlenkerB. R. (2012). Self-presentation. In LearyM. R.TangneyJ. P. (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (2nd ed., pp. 542–570). Guilford Press.
63.
SchmitzF.Teige-MocigembaS.VossA.KlauerK. C. (2013). When scoring algorithms matter: Effects of working memory load on different IAT scores. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02057.x
64.
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
Teige-MocigembaS.KlauerK. C. (2008). ‘Automatic’ evaluation? Strategic effects on affective priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1414–1417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.004
67.
ThibaultJ.WalkerL. (1975). Procedural justice: A social psychological analysis. Lawrence Elbaum Associates.
68.
UhlmannE. L.BrescollV. L.PaluckE. L. (2006). Are members of low status groups perceived as bad, or badly off? Egalitarian negative associations and automatic prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(4), 491–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.10.003
69.
UnkelbachC.FiedlerK. (2020). The challenge of diagnostic inferences from implicit measures: The case of non-evaluative influences in the evaluative priming paradigm. Social Cognition, 38(Suppl.), s208–s222. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2020.38.supp.s208
70.
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
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.
