.png){kind=icon}
返回
Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
In reporting Implicit Association Test (IAT) results, researchers have most often used scoring conventions described in the first publication of the IAT (A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998). Demonstration IATs available on the Internet have produced large data sets that were used in the current article to evaluate alternative scoring procedures. Candidate new algorithms were examined in terms of their (a) correlations with parallel self-report measures, (b) resistance to an artifact associated with speed of responding, (c) internal consistency, (d) sensitivity to known influences on IAT measures, and (e) resistance to known procedural influences. The best-performing measure incorporates data from the IAT's practice trials, uses a metric that is calibrated by each respondent's latency variability, and includes a latency penalty for errors. This new algorithm strongly outperforms the earlier (conventional) procedure.
Keyword:
SPEED-ACCURACY TRADEOFF
INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES
ATTITUDES
VALIDITY
PREJUDICE
BIAS
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
6.7
论文数:
7.0K
被引数:
8.2W
机构
暂无机构信息
引用论文
分享收藏Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency.png)
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETINIF19.8
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容