Cited by 973Social and Intergroup PsychologyPsychometric Methodologies and TestingRacial and Ethnic Identity Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implicit Attitude Measures: Consistency, Stability, and Convergent Validity

Open access

Abstract

In recent years, several techniques have been developed to measure implicit social cognition. Despite their increased use, little attention has been devoted to their reliability and validity. This article undertakes a direct assessment of the interitem consistency, stability, and convergent validity of some implicit attitude measures. Attitudes toward blacks and whites were measured on four separate occasions, each 2 weeks apart, using three relatively implicit measures (response-window evaluative priming, the Implicit Association Test, and the response-window Implicit Association Test) and one explicit measure (Modern Racism Scale). After correcting for interitem inconsistency with latent variable analyses, we found that (a) stability indices improved and (b) implicit measures were substantially correlated with each other, forming a single latent factor. The psychometric properties of response-latency implicit measures have greater integrity than recently suggested.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9280.00328

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Blair I.V., Cognitive social psychology: On the future of social cognition
  2. Kawakami K., Dovidio J.F. (in press). Implicit stereotyping: How reliable is it? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 973

Metadata

Authors
Cunningham, W. A., Preacher, K. J., & Banaji, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Cunningham, William A.
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2001-03
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
163-170
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2098098526
Cited by
968
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 64 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 36
FWCI
113.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KU ScholarWorks (University of Kansas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH-57672, R01MH057672)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
Keywords
implicit attitudes, reliability statistics, convergent validity, test-retest stability, Implicit Association Test, affective priming, racial attitudes, latent factor structure, response latency
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Tests, Prejudice, Projective Techniques, Psychometrics, Semantic Differential, Reproducibility of Results

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