Abstract
The sorting paired features (SPF) task measures four associations in a single response block. Using four response options (e.g., good-Republicans, bad-Republicans, good-Democrats, and bad-Democrats), each trial requires participants to categorize two stimuli at once to a category pair (e.g., wonderful-Clinton to good-Democrats). Unlike other association measures, the SPF requires simultaneous categorization of both components of the association in the same trial. Providing measurement flexibility, it is sensitive to both focal, attended concepts and nonfocal, unattended stimulus features (e.g., gender of individuals in a politics SPF). Three studies measure race, gender, and political evaluations, differentiate automatic evaluations between known groups, provide evidence of convergent and discriminant validity with other attitude measures, and illustrate the SPF’s unique measurement qualities.
References
2008). A comparison between the SPF and evaluative priming. Unpublished manuscript (www.briannosek.com/spf).
(2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 631–643.
(2004). The implicit association test’s D measure can minimize a cognitive skill confound: Comment on McFarland and Crouch (2002). Social Cognition, 22, 673–684.
(1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
(1971). Proactive inhibition in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 91, 120–123.
(2001). Implicit attitude measures: Consistency, stability, and convergent validity. Psychological Science, 12, 163–170.
(2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 800–814.
(2003). The extrinsic affective Simon task. Experimental Psychology, 50, 77–85.
(1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013–1027.
(2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25.
(1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
(2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
(1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability and salience. In , Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). Guilford: New York.
(2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16–32.
(2005). Task-set inertia, attitude accessibility, and compatibility-order effects: New evidence for a task-set switching account of the implicit association test effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 208–217.
(2003). Method-specific variance in the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1180–1192.
(2005). Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 565–584.
(2007). Implicit-explicit relations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 65–69.
(2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666.
(2005). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 166–180.
(2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In , Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265–292). Psychology Press: New York.
(2007). A multitrait-multimethod validation of the implicit association test: Implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct constructs. Experimental Psychology, 54, 14–29.
(2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88.
(2007). Faulty assumptions: A comment on Blanton, Jaccard, Gonzales, and Christie (2006). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 393–398.
(2003). Relations between implicit measures of prejudice: What are we measuring? Psychological Science, 14, 36–39.
(2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293.
(2008). Distinguishing automatic and controlled components of attitudes from direct and indirect measurement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 386–396.
(2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 494–509.
(2007a). Affective focus increases the concordance between implicit and explicit attitudes. Unpublished manuscript.
(2007b). Unpublished manuscript.
(2008). Unpublished manuscript.
(in press). The brief implicit association test. Experimental Psychology.
(2008). Scale invariant contrasts of response latency distributions. Unpublished manuscript.
(1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In , The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
(2008). Why positive information is processed faster: The density hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 36–49.
(2008). Reliability of the SPF: Test-retest and internal consistency. Unpublished manuscript (www.briannosek.com/spf).
(2004). Single target implicit associations. Unpublished manuscript.
(1959). The comparison of regression variables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 21, 396–399.
(2007). Principles of mental representation. In , Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 285–307). New York: Guilford.
(