Implicit and explicit measures of prejudice and stereotyping: do they assess the same underlying knowledge structure?

Do implicit and explicit measures of ethnic attitudes assess the same underlying knowledge structure in long term memory? This study uses both a correlational and an experimental design (N = 133) in order to address this central question. In the first part, we suggest that self‐presentational strategies can partly explain why the relation between implicit and explicit measures is inconsistent in the existing literature. More specifically, we show that when there are strong norms against prejudice, implicit and explicit measures are significantly negatively related. In the second part, an experimental manipulation of relative gratification (RG), the opposite of relative deprivation, reveals that when the level of explicit prejudice increases (RG condition), a similar effect is also observed at the implicit level. Together, these results suggest that implicit and explicit measures assess similar knowledge structure. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Mimicry reduces racial prejudice

Humans are empathic animals. We automatically match other people's motor responses, allowing us to get “under the skin” of other people. Although this perception–action-coupling—a form of motor resonance—occurs spontaneously, this happens less readily with the outgroup (vs. the ingroup) and for those high (vs. low) in prejudice. Thus, prejudice diminishes our tendency to resonate with the outgroup. Here we suggest that the reverse is also possible—that resonating with the actions of an outgroup member can reduce prejudice. We predict, in other words, that explicitly mimicking the outgroup can reduce prejudice. Participants watched a 140-second video depicting actors repeatedly reaching for and drinking from a glass of water. They passively watched a video with Black actors; watched the video and mimicked the Black actors; or watched and mimicked a video with actors from their ingroup. Participants then completed the Affect Misattribution Procedure (Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005), a measure of implicit anti-Black prejudice, and an explicit symbolic racism measure. Results indicate that the outgroup-mimicry group had similar implicit preference for Blacks and Whites, unlike the other two groups, which preferred Whites over Blacks. The outgroup-mimicry group also reported less explicit racism towards Blacks than the ingroup-mimicry group, but no less than the ingroup-observation group. Mimicking specific outgroup members, therefore, reduces implicit, and possibly explicit, bias against the outgroup more generally.     

Don't ignore the other half: the impact of ingroup identification on implicit measures of prejudice

Recently several implicit measures of prejudice have been developed. Prejudice indices based on these measures are computed from response differences to positive and negative targets resulting from outgroup compared to ingroup stimuli. Up to now the focus of research involving these measures has mainly been on attitudes and relations to outgroups (i.e. negative attitudes towards the outgroup). It is suggested here that implicit measures of prejudice are also influenced by one's relation towards the ingroup (i.e. ingroup identification), because they involve ingroup as well as outgroup stimuli. A correlational study and an experiment were conducted that supported this prediction. Implications for the application of implicit measures are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Finding the faithless: perceived atheist prevalence reduces anti-atheist prejudice

Although prejudice is typically positively related to relative outgroup size, four studies found converging evidence that perceived atheist prevalence reduces anti-atheist prejudice. Study 1 demonstrated that anti-atheist prejudice among religious believers is reduced in countries in which atheists are especially prevalent. Study 2 demonstrated that perceived atheist prevalence is negatively associated with anti-atheist prejudice. Study 3 demonstrated a causal relationship: Reminders of atheist prevalence reduced explicit distrust of atheists. These results appeared distinct from intergroup contact effects. Study 4 demonstrated that prevalence information decreased implicit atheist distrust. The latter two experiments provide the first evidence that mere prevalence information can reduce prejudice against any outgroup. These findings offer insights about anti-atheist prejudice, a poorly understood phenomenon. Furthermore, they suggest both novel directions for future prejudice research and potential interventions that could reduce a variety of prejudices.     

Employment discrimination: the role of implicit attitudes, motivation, and a climate for racial bias

This study is an attempt to replicate and extend research on employment discrimination by A. P. Brief and colleagues (A. P. Brief, J. Dietz, R. R. Cohen, S. D. Pugh, & J. B. Vaslow, 2000). More specifically, the authors attempted (a) to constructively replicate the prior finding that an explicit measure of modern racism would interact with a corporate climate for racial bias to predict discrimination in a hiring context and (b) to extend this finding through the measurement of implicit racist attitudes and motivation to control prejudice. Although the authors were unable to replicate the earlier interaction, they did illustrate that implicit racist attitudes interacted with a climate for racial bias to predict discrimination. Further, results partially illustrate that motivation to control prejudice moderates the relationship between explicit and implicit attitudes. Taken together, the findings illustrate the differences between implicit and explicit racial attitudes in predicting discriminatory behavior.     

The Role of Christianity and Islam in Explaining Prejudice against Asylum Seekers: Evidence from Malaysia

ABSTRACT

Prejudicial attitudes toward asylum seekers are prevalent, and an emerging body of literature has revealed that this is partly driven by religious affiliation. The population of Malaysia is multireligious, making it a fruitful location for testing religion-based prejudice hypotheses. Thus, across 2 studies we tested the roles of Christianity and Islam in explicit and implicit prejudices against asylum seekers in the Malaysian context. In Study 1 (n = 97), we present evidence that there are religion-based differences in prejudice against asylum seekers; specifically, Muslims reported higher levels of (classical) explicit prejudice toward asylum seekers than Christians (there were no differences in conditional or implicit prejudices). In Study 2 (n = 117), we tested the hypothesis that these religion-based differences are qualified by the religion of the asylum seeker. In this study, we used a framing paradigm to experimentally manipulate the religion of the asylum-seeking targets. The results revealed an out-group exacerbation effect; that is, participants reported higher levels of prejudice toward asylum seekers who had a different religion from their own. For classical explicit prejudice, the effect was strongest from Muslims toward Christian asylum seekers. Conversely, for implicit prejudice, the reverse was true: The effect was strongest from Christians toward Muslim asylum seekers. These findings are discussed in terms of the political and social circumstances in Malaysia, but we interpret these findings as evidence that explicit and implicit attitudes toward asylum seekers are driven by a complex pattern of religion-based intergroup biases.     

Differences in Anglo and Asian Australians' explicit and implicit prejudice and the attenuation of their implicit in-group bias

Research has shown that not only are minority groups capable of possessing implicit and explicit prejudice but that the study of their attitudes provides unique insight into the nature of prejudice. The current study found that in an Australian context, Asian participants displayed significantly less implicit prejudice and significantly greater explicit prejudice than their Anglo counterparts. This finding provided further evidence of the dissociation of explicit and implicit attitudes, specifically in regard to their predication. In addition, the attenuation of the implicit prejudice of both the Anglo majority and Asian minority group members was investigated. Brief exposure to positive out-group exemplars was found to attenuate the implicit bias of Asian but not Anglo participants, suggesting that this technique may be contingent upon more fundamental prejudice-reducing measures and providing further support that the undermining of implicit biases requires long-term, effortful processes.     

Reach Out and Reduce Prejudice: The Impact of Interpersonal Touch on Intergroup Liking

A brief, casual interpersonal touch results in positive behavior toward the toucher, presumably because touch is a cue to friendship. Research on intergroup contact shows that feelings of friendship toward an individual outgroup member reduce prejudice toward that entire group. Integrating these areas, we examined whether interpersonal touch by an outgroup member could reduce prejudice. In three replications in two studies, interpersonal touch decreased implicit, though not explicit, prejudice toward the toucher's group. Effects of interpersonal touch can extend beyond the toucher to others sharing the toucher's ethnicity, and findings suggest that such effects are automatic and outside conscious awareness.     

Gender differences in implicit prejudice

In three experiments (n=131), we examined gender differences in implicit (and explicit) racial prejudice employing priming of immigrant and Swedish facial photographs without attention or without awareness. Implicit prejudice was defined as the degree of negativity expressed toward a person described in a subsequent ambiguous story in an impression formation task. We found, contrary to our hypothesis, that women displayed systematically higher implicit prejudice than men in all three experiments, although men scored higher on explicit prejudice than women. The results are discussed against the background of related prejudice research, the dissociation of implicit and explicit prejudice, and gender differences in cognitive functioning, especially in the processing of pictorial stimuli.     

Now you see it, now you don't: explicit versus implicit measures of the personal/group discrimination discrepancy

When making explicit self-report ratings, members of status- and racial-minority groups report less personal experience with discrimination than that encountered by their group—a phenomenon called the personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD). This study provides evidence, for the first time, that the PGDD may be, in part, a product of the procedure used to measure it. White women and men completed explicit and implicit measures of personal and group discrimination based on sex. The PGDD surfaced among women in the explicit measures, but not in the implicit measures. These findings suggest that explicit and implicit measures might provide different assessments of experience with discrimination.     

Disgusted but not afraid: Feelings toward same-sex kissing reveal subtle homonegativity

Overt sexual prejudice is declining, but heterosexuals who report little to no prejudice may still harbor subtle biases against gay men and lesbians. We examined implicit prejudice in a sample of 37 heterosexual college students who reported little or no sexual prejudice, using the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP) and psychophysiological measures of affect. Skin conductance, heart rate, and facial electromyographic responses were recorded as participants viewed photos of mixed- and same-sex couples kissing and rated them on valence, arousal, and disgustingness. Sexual prejudice was evident in implicit (AMP) ratings and explicit ratings of valence and disgustingness, but not in psychophysiological responses. Results suggest that implicit prejudice harbored by young adults who endorse low levels of sexual prejudice is more cognitively than emotionally based, unlike the fear-based reactions commonly described for racism. Limitations and future directions for research are discussed.     

Mind the gap: Increasing associations between the self and Blacks with approach behaviors

Although perceived differences between outgroup social categories and the self are often cited as a major contributor to prejudice and intergroup tension, surprisingly few studies have examined ways to improve associations between the self and racial outgroups. The present research investigated one strategy to increase these associations-approach training. Specifically, 3 studies investigated the impact of training participants to conceptually approach Blacks on 3 separate measures: 2 response latency measures indexing the strength of association between the self and Blacks and a psychophysiological measure indexing brain activity in response to Blacks in the context of the self. A fourth study examined the link between earlier research on the impact of approach training on implicit prejudice against Blacks and the current results related to self-Black associations. Together, these findings provided consistent evidence that training in approaching Blacks increases associations between the self and Blacks that in turn reduce implicit prejudice against Blacks.     

Implicit Measures Reveal Evidence of Personal Discrimination

A well-known result, the person–group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD), shows that members of disadvantaged groups believe that other members of their social groups are discriminated against, but that they themselves are not. In this paper, we test whether this explicit self-protective strategy is also obtained on indirect measures of personal discrimination. Three experiments, using both explicit (self-report) and implicit (IAT) measures of discrimination showed that although members of disadvantaged groups do not explicitly report self-discrimination (replicating previous research), they do reveal self-discrimination on the implicit measure. That the PGDD effect is bound to explicit measurement should be recognized both when implementing research protocols and when understanding the effects of discrimination whether it is consciously recognized or not.     

On the self-regulation of implicit and explicit prejudice: a self -determination theory perspective

The present study identifies a broad taxonomy of motives underlying the desire to regulate prejudice and assess the impact of motivation to regulate prejudice on levels of explicit and implicit prejudice. Using self-determination theory as the foundation, six forms of motivation to regulate prejudice are proposed. In Study 1 (N = 257), an exploratory factor analysis reveals evidence for the six proposed dimensions. In Study 2 (N = 198), the six-factor taxonomy of motivation to regulate prejudice is further validated using a confirmatory factor analysis, and construct validity is obtained. In Study 3 (N = 62), motivation to regulate prejudice is manipulated before participants complete the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and explicit measures of prejudice. Results reveal that those with highly self-determined regulation of prejudice demonstrate lower implicit and explicit prejudice than their less self-determined counterparts. Results are discussed in terms of an increased understanding of the motivation to control prejudice.     

The structure of prejudice: associative strength as a determinant of stereotype endorsement

Previous research obtained inconsistent findings as to whether implicit and explicit measures of prejudice are related. According to our view, some of these inconsistencies are due to whether implicit measures assess exclusively the strength of association between the social category and the evaluation or the activation of the social category in addition. Derived from recent theorizing we suggest that it is especially associative strength between the social category and its evaluation that determines the endorsement of prejudice assessed in explicit measures. To test this assumption we used the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to assess the associative strength of German students' prejudice towards Turkish people and the Blatant‐and‐Subtle‐Prejudice‐Scale (BS scale) as an explicit measure of prejudice. We obtained evidence for prejudice at a relative level in that the category of Turks was more closely associated with a negative evaluation and the category of Germans more closely associated with a positive evaluation. In line with our assumptions the implicit measure was correlated with the explicit measure in that the stronger the representation of Turks was associated with a negative evaluation the more prejudiced individuals responded in the explicit prejudice measure. Using a trait assignment technique, we found that neither associative strength nor the endorsement of the prejudice in the explicit measure were related to the contents of the stereotype. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What do you think about ink? An examination of implicit and explicit attitudes toward tattooed individuals

Tattoos are increasing in popularity, yet minimal research has examined implicit attitudes or the relationship between implicit and explicit attitudes toward tattooed individuals. Seventy-seven online participants (Mage = 36.09, 52% women, 78% white, 26% tattooed) completed measures assessing implicit and explicit attitudes toward tattooed individuals. Results revealed evidence of negative implicit attitudes, which were associated with less perceived warmth, competence, and negative explicit evaluations. However, implicit attitudes were not correlated with measures of disgust or social distance. In addition, age predicted implicit prejudice, but other individual difference measures—such as personal tattoo possession, political identity, and internal/external motivations to respond without prejudice—did not. These findings are discussed in terms of how attitudes toward tattooed individuals may be multifaceted, and research may benefit from measuring implicit and explicit attitudes.     

Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election

The 2008 US presidential election was an unprecedented opportunity to study the role of racial prejudice in political decision making. Although explicitly expressed prejudice has declined dramatically during the last four decades, more subtle implicit forms of prejudice (which come to mind automatically and may influence behavior unintentionally) may still exist. In three surveys of representative samples of American adults, explicit and implicit prejudice were measured during the months preceding the election. Both explicit and implicit prejudice were significant predictors of later vote choice. Citizens higher in explicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Barack Obama and more likely to vote for John McCain. After controlling for explicit prejudice, citizens higher in implicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Obama, but were not more likely to vote for McCain. Instead, they were more likely to either abstain or to vote for a third-party candidate rather than Obama. The results suggest that racial prejudice may continue to influence the voting process even among people who would not endorse these attitudes.     

The association between implicit and explicit prejudice: the moderating role of motivation to control prejudiced reactions

The main aim of the present research was to assess the relationship between implicit and explicit ethnic attitude measures and to examine the impact of motivation to control prejudiced reactions on this relation. Implicit ethnic prejudice was assessed by a response latency measure, and a self-report modern prejudice scale was used to assess explicit prejudice. The results showed that an association between implicit and explicit attitudes was observed only when the explicit attitude measure was corrected for motivational bias. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research reporting either association or dissociation between implicit and explicit attitude measures.     

Group identification moderates emotional responses to perceived prejudice

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.     

Understanding the relations between different forms of racial prejudice: a cognitive consistency perspective

Research on racial prejudice is currently characterized by the existence of diverse concepts (e.g., implicit prejudice, old-fashioned racism, modern racism, aversive racism) that are not well integrated from a general perspective. The present article proposes an integrative framework for these concepts employing a cognitive consistency perspective. Specifically, it is argued that the reliance on immediate affective reactions toward racial minority groups in evaluative judgments about these groups depends on the consistency of this evaluation with other relevant beliefs pertaining to central components of old-fashioned, modern, and aversive forms of prejudice. A central prediction of the proposed framework is that the relation between "implicit" and "explicit" prejudice should be moderated by the interaction of egalitarianism-related, nonprejudicial goals and perceptions of discrimination. This prediction was confirmed in a series of three studies. Implications for research on prejudice are discussed.