Reducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Implicit preferences are malleable, but does that change last? We tested 9 interventions (8 real and 1 sham) to reduce implicit racial preferences over time. In 2 studies with a total of 6,321 participants, all 9 interventions immediately reduced implicit preferences. However, none were effective after a delay of several hours to several days. We also found that these interventions did not change explicit racial preferences and were not reliably moderated by motivations to respond without prejudice. Short-term malleability in implicit preferences does not necessarily lead to long-term change, raising new questions about the flexibility and stability of implicit preferences. (PsycINFO Database Record
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
There is a lack of evidence in the effectiveness of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives (DEI).
“especially given the lack of evidence in the effectiveness of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives (DEI; Paluck et al., 2021;Forscher et al., 2019;Lai et al., 2016).”
From The state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions (2023) · cites this paper as Lai et al., 2016
The General Discussion (p. 22) reports that nine interventions reduced implicit racial preferences immediately, but none remained effective after a delay. This supports concern about lasting effects of the tested bias-reduction interventions, not a general claim that evidence is lacking for the effectiveness of DEI initiatives as a whole. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe IAT reduces the participant's capacity to voluntarily control their response, but does not necessarily completely eliminate the possibility of manipulation.
“Es importante tener en mente que se habla de que el IAT reduce la capacidad de que el participante controle voluntariamente su respuesta, pero no necesariamente elimina completamente la posibilidad de manipulación.”
From El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica (2022) · cites this paper as Lai et al., 2016
The “Intentional Strategies to Overcome Biases” section (p. 11) says participants could use strategies to fake the IAT by subverting its procedure, supporting the possibility of manipulation. The paper does not establish the other part of the claim: that the IAT reduces participants’ capacity to control their responses voluntarily. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWhen participants receive instructions to give false responses on the IAT, they achieve different results than when they do not receive that instruction.
“Por ejemplo, se ha visto que cuando los participantes reciben instrucciones para que den respuestas falsas en el IAT, efectivamente logran resultados diferentes a cuando no reciben esa instrucción, sugiriendo así que el IAT no es inmune a la manipulación intencional (Lai et al., 2016).”
From El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica (2022) · cites this paper as Lai et al., 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 81 · Cited by 624
- Authors
- Lai, C. K., Skinner, A. L., Cooley, E., Murrar, S., Brauer, M., Devos, T., Calanchini, J., Xiao, Y. J., Pedram, C., Marshburn, C. K., Simon, S., Blanchar, J. C., Joy-Gaba, J. A., Conway, J., Redford, L., Klein, R. A., Roussos, G., Schellhaas, F. M. H., Burns, M., Hu, X., McLean, M. C., Axt, J. R., Asgari, S., Schmidt, K., Rubinstein, R., Marini, M., Rubichi, S., Shin, J.-E. L., & Nosek, B. A.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Colgate University (US)
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- San Diego State University (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- New York University (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Carleton College (US)
- University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
- Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Measurement Incorporated (United States) (US)
- Wesleyan University (US)
- University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Center for Open Science (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lai, Calvin K.
- ORCID
- Lai, Calvin K.
- Skinner, Allison L.
- Cooley, Erin
- Murrar, Sohad
- Devos, Thierry
- Calanchini, Jimmy
- Xiao, Y. Jenny
- Marshburn, Christopher K.
- Simon, Stefanie
- Blanchar, John C.
- Joy-Gaba, Jennifer A.
- Redford, Liz
- Roussos, Gina
- Burns, Mason
- Hu, Xiaoqing
- Axt, Jordan R.
- Schmidt, Kathleen
- Rubinstein, Rachel
- Marini, Maddalena
- Rubichi, Sandro
- Nosek, Brian A.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 145
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1001-1016
- ISSN
- 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2222
- OpenAlex
- W3122306322
- Cited by
- 624
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 12 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 122.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
- Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Keywords
- implicit prejudice, intervention effectiveness, long-term trends, prejudice reduction
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Prejudice, Stereotyping, Racial Groups, Young Adult
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
