Conceptual clarification and implicit-association tests: psychometric evidence for racist attitudes

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Critics of the Implicit Association Test (IAT)—a measure of the strength of a person’s automatic, memory-based association between two concepts, such as “black” and “threatening” or “white” and “caring”—have at least three main objections. Their symmetry argument (SA) is that the IAT should but does not give equally valid results for black-on-white and white-on-black racism. Their cultural-awareness argument (AA) is that the IAT illegitimately presupposes that use of racial stereotypes presupposes no stereotype acceptance, only stereotype awareness. Their completeness argument (CA) is that at best the IAT measures only questionable or implicit, not explicit, bias because IAT ignores the fact that subjects’ conscious desires to avoid bias often enable them to check their biased behavior. Examining each of these anti-IAT stances, the paper summarizes the IAT and then argues for 6 main claims. (1) Clarifying concepts like racism is important for progress in social science. (2) IAT critics’ SA presupposes an ahistorical/acultural concept of racism. (3) IAT critics’ AA presupposes a linguistically-insensitive concept of racism, one presupposing that the language we use provides no behavioral evidence for racism. (4) IAT critics’ CA presupposes a concept of racism subject to conscious, deliberate control. (5) IAT proponents endorse a more plausible concept of racism, one that is contextual, linguistically sensitive, and often not susceptible to conscious control. (6) Although the IAT debate is unsettled, IAT critics’ use of a questionable concept of racism gives grounds for doubting their claims.