Cited by 580Social and Intergroup PsychologyPsychological Testing and AssessmentDeception detection and forensic psychology

Implicit social cognition: from measures to mechanisms

Open access
Nosek, Brian A., Hawkins, Carlee Beth, Frazier, Rebecca S.·2011·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Most human cognition occurs outside conscious awareness or conscious control. Some of these implicit processes influence social perception, judgment and action. The past 15 years of research in implicit social cognition can be characterized as the Age of Measurement because of a proliferation of measurement methods and research evidence demonstrating their practical value for predicting human behavior. Implicit measures assess constructs that are distinct, but related, to self-report assessments, and predict variation in behavior that is not accounted for by those explicit measures. The present state of knowledge provides a foundation for the next age of implicit social cognition: clarification of the mechanisms underlying implicit measurement and how the measured constructs influence behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.005

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Humans are generally unaware of their implicit cognitions or attitudes and therefore not able to adequately report on them.

    “Humans are generally unaware of their implicit cognitions or attitudes, and therefore not be able to adequately report on them.”

    From Human- versus Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as Nosek et al. (2011)

    In “The Mind Beyond What Is Self-Reported” (page not provided), Nosek says some mental content may be inaccessible to introspection and that self-report accuracy is uncertain. The paper does not say people are generally unaware of their implicit attitudes or therefore unable to report them adequately; it explicitly allows that self-report can be accurate and identifies other limits on reporting. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Like our own brains, artificial neural networks are fundamentally intransparent.

    “Like our own brains, artificial neural networks are fundamentally intransparant (Nosek et al., 2011; Feldman-Barret, 2017).”

    From Human- versus Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as Nosek et al., 2011

    In “The Mind Beyond What Is Self-Reported” (page not provided), the paper says that only a small portion of brain activity is available to consciousness, supporting the point about limited insight into our own minds. It does not address whether artificial neural networks are intransparent, so it does not support the comparison. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 128 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nosek, B. A., Hawkins, C. B., & Frazier, R. S.
Affiliations
University of Virginia (US)
Corresponding author
Nosek, Brian A.
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-04
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
152-159
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088840132
Cited by
578
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 34
FWCI
16.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R21AG033862)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
Keywords
implicit social cognition, implicit measures, implicit processing, social perception, social judgment, behavior prediction, self-report measures, measurement mechanism
MeSH terms
Awareness, Cognition, Consciousness, Humans, Models, Psychological, Neuropsychological Tests, Social Behavior, Weights and Measures, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review