Schimmack Ulrich
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto Mississauga.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Mar;16(2):396-414. doi: 10.1177/1745691619863798. Epub 2019 Oct 24.
In 1998, Greenwald, McGhee, and Schwartz proposed that the Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures individual differences in implicit social cognition. This claim requires evidence of construct validity. I review the evidence and show that there is insufficient evidence for this claim. Most important, I show that few studies were able to test discriminant validity of the IAT as a measure of implicit constructs. I examine discriminant validity in several multimethod studies and find little or no evidence of discriminant validity. I also show that validity of the IAT as a measure of attitudes varies across constructs. Validity of the self-esteem IAT is low, but estimates vary across studies. About 20% of the variance in the race IAT reflects racial preferences. The highest validity is obtained for measuring political orientation with the IAT (64%). Most of this valid variance stems from a distinction between individuals with opposing attitudes, whereas reaction times contribute less than 10% of variance in the prediction of explicit attitude measures. In all domains, explicit measures are more valid than the IAT, but the IAT can be used as a measure of sensitive attitudes to reduce measurement error by using a multimethod measurement model.
1998年,格林沃尔德、麦吉和施瓦茨提出,内隐联想测验(IAT)可测量内隐社会认知中的个体差异。这一说法需要有结构效度的证据支持。我回顾了相关证据并表明,这一说法缺乏充分的证据。最重要的是,我发现很少有研究能够检验IAT作为内隐结构测量方法的区分效度。我在多项多方法研究中检验了区分效度,几乎没有发现区分效度的证据。我还表明,IAT作为态度测量方法的效度因结构不同而有所差异。自尊IAT的效度较低,但不同研究的估计结果有所不同。种族IAT中约20%的方差反映了种族偏好。使用IAT测量政治取向的效度最高(64%)。这种有效方差大部分源于具有相反态度的个体之间的差异,而反应时间在明确态度测量预测中的方差贡献不到10%。在所有领域中,明确测量方法比IAT更有效,但IAT可以用作敏感态度的测量方法,通过使用多方法测量模型来减少测量误差。