Abstract
Performance-based incentives may improve the validity of results from implicit attitude assessment tasks and improve attrition rates. Participants working to obtain the incentive may be less likely to edit their responses to conform to social expectations and more likely to meet experimental inclusion criteria. We examined the influences of a monetary incentive ($20 voucher) for fast and accurate performance on an Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) task evaluating implicit attitudes about bodyweight. We randomly assigned 82 university students to incentive and control (non-incentive) groups. Although there was no significant effect on accuracy or latency measures, participants in the incentive group displayed a significantly stronger bias against overweight individuals than did participants in the control group. There were no differences between groups with respect to attitudes toward slim individuals. More participants in the incentive group (97.5%) met performance criteria than in the control group (87.8%). These results suggest that incentives for meeting performance criteria may reduce the attrition rate and increase the validity of the IRAP and other implicit measures, but additional research is required to determine the predictive validity of implicit attitude assessments with and without performance-based incentives.
Highlights
Implicit measures are intended to provide an “unedited” view of an individual’s associative learning history by revealing their initial reactions to stimuli, such as the sight of someone from a specific ethnic group
We conducted a preliminary analysis of the block-sequence effect on the group of participants exposed to an anti-fat & pro-slim trial first and on the group exposed to a pro-fat & anti-slim trial first
The analysis showed no significant effect of order on D-Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) scores, t(318) = -.54, p =
Summary
Implicit measures are intended to provide an “unedited” view of an individual’s associative learning history by revealing their initial reactions to stimuli, such as the sight of someone from a specific ethnic group. People are often unaware of their own immediate response (or “attitude”) to these stimuli and, there are social pressures that discourage certain reactions. Explicit measures, such as survey outcomes, may be unreliable or inaccurate, when the survey is related to a socially sensitive subject [1,2,3]. Most procedures are based on response latency (reaction time) and categorization errors, including the Go/No-Go Association Task (e.g., [4]) and the Implicit Association Test (IAT; e.g., [5]) These tests are based on the idea that the strength (or cognitive persistence) of a paired-stimulus association can be measured by participants’ response latencies in time-pressured categorization tasks. In a review of the evidence, Nosek, Hawkins, and Frazier [6] found that implicit measures tend to be better predictors of behavior than explicit measures where there is risk of social censure
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Psychology & Behavior Analysis
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
