Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 142 of the 142 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What Do Implicit Measures Tell Us?: Scrutinizing the Validity of Three Common Assumptions

Gawronski, Bertram, LeBel, Etienne P., Peters, Kurt R.·2007·Perspectives on Psychological Science

Abstract

Experimental paradigms designed to assess “implicit” representations are currently very popular in many areas of psychology. The present article addresses the validity of three widespread assumptions in research using these paradigms: that (a) implicit measures reflect unconscious or introspectively inaccessible representations; (b) the major difference between implicit measures and self-reports is that implicit measures are resistant or less susceptible to social desirability; and (c) implicit measures reflect highly stable, older representations that have their roots in long-term socialization experiences. Drawing on a review of the available evidence, we conclude that the validity of all three assumptions is equivocal and that theoretical interpretations should be adjusted accordingly. We discuss an alternative conceptualization that distinguishes between activation and validation processes.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00036.x

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 142 references

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.380 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.380 · Paper page
  2. 10.1080/02699930126251 · doi:10.1080/02699930126251
  3. 10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.869 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.869 · Paper page
  4. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.828 · DOI
  5. 10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.631 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.631 · Paper page
  6. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.800 · DOI · Paper page
  7. De Houwer J., 2003, The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion, 219
  8. 10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1441 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1441 · Paper page
  9. Gawronski B., Attitudes: Insights from the new wave of implicit measures
  10. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.774 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.774
  11. 10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.5 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.5
  12. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.842 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.842 · Paper page
  13. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.270 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.270 · Paper page
  14. 10.1037/0096-3445.106.3.226 · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.106.3.226 · Paper page
  15. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.181 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.811 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1037/0021-843X.110.2.226 · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.110.2.226 · Paper page
  18. 10.1037/0021-843X.111.4.648 · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.111.4.648 · Paper page

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Gawronski, B., LeBel, E. P., & Peters, K. R.
Venue
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Published
2007-06
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
181-193
ISSN
  • 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6924
OpenAlex
W2056258999
Cited by
287
References
142
FWCI
35.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Do Implicit Measures Tell Us?: Scrutinizing the Validity of Three Common Assumptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00036.x
The paper
Gawronski, B., LeBel, E. P., & Peters, K. R. (2007). What Do Implicit Measures Tell Us?: Scrutinizing the Validity of Three Common Assumptions. Perspectives on Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00036.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.