Implicit and explicit attitude measures lead to divergent results
Pro Research Analysisby 
Searched over 200M research papers
Consensus Meter
Divergent Results in Implicit and Explicit Attitude Measures
Predictive Validity of Implicit and Explicit Attitudes in Behavior
Research indicates that implicit and explicit attitude measures often yield divergent results due to their differential predictive validity in various contexts. Explicit attitudes, typically measured through self-report questionnaires, are more predictive of deliberate and controlled behaviors. In contrast, implicit attitudes, often assessed using tools like the Implicit Association Test (IAT), are better predictors of spontaneous and less controlled behaviors. For instance, cognitive capacity and self-regulatory resources have been shown to moderate the predictive validity of both implicit and explicit attitudes in tasks related to food choice and consumption behavior.
Attitude Change: Implicit vs. Explicit Measures
Studies have demonstrated that implicit and explicit measures can show different patterns of attitude change. Implicit measures are more likely to reflect new automatic associations formed through experimental manipulations, whereas explicit measures may remain unchanged due to the consideration of additional information that mitigates the impact of these automatic associations. This suggests that implicit attitudes can be more malleable in response to new stimuli compared to explicit attitudes, which are often more stable and resistant to change.
Language Attitudes and Divergence in Measures
In the domain of language attitudes, implicit and explicit measures can also diverge significantly. For example, research using the IAT to measure attitudes toward foreign and U.S. accented speech found a pro-U.S. accent bias on implicit measures, while explicit measures showed a pro-foreign accent bias. This divergence underscores the notion that implicit and explicit attitudes are distinct constructs influenced by different cognitive processes.
Structural Fit and Correlation Between Measures
The correlation between implicit and explicit attitude measures can be influenced by the structural fit of the tests used. When the task demands of implicit and explicit tests are made more similar, the correlation between the two measures increases. This suggests that differences in test formats can lead to underestimations of the relationship between implicit and explicit cognition.
Temporal Stability of Attitude Measures
Implicit and explicit measures also differ in their temporal stability. Longitudinal studies have shown that implicit measures tend to be less stable over time compared to explicit measures, which are more consistent. This finding challenges the assumption that implicit attitudes are more resistant to change and highlights the need for further research into the stability of these measures over time.
Implicit Association Test (IAT) and Explicit Attitudes
The IAT has been widely used to measure implicit attitudes, but its relationship with explicit attitudes is often weak. Studies have found that while explicit attitudes can predict behavior, the IAT does not always do so. Additionally, the IAT is sensitive to new associations formed in the environment, whereas explicit attitudes remain more stable. This supports the view that the IAT reflects environmental associations rather than personal endorsements of those associations.
Implicit and Explicit Attitudes in Children and Adolescents
A meta-analysis of studies on children and adolescents revealed that both implicit and explicit attitudes independently predict behavior, with explicit attitudes having a larger effect size. The analysis also found that implicit measures had a stronger effect on social bias behaviors compared to other types of behaviors. These findings support an additive model where both types of attitudes contribute to behavior, emphasizing the importance of considering both measures in research involving younger populations.
Affective Focus and Attitude Concordance
The concordance between implicit and explicit attitudes can be increased by focusing on affective components. Studies have shown that when participants focus on affective aspects of attitudes, the relationship between implicit and explicit measures becomes stronger. This suggests that implicit evaluations are more closely related to affective components than cognitive ones.
Individual Differences and Moderation Effects
Individual differences, such as the Self-Reported Habit Index (SRHI) and Need for Cognition (NFC), can moderate the relationship between implicit and explicit attitudes and behavior. Higher levels of these individual difference variables are associated with stronger relationships between the respective attitude measures and behavior. This highlights the role of personal characteristics in the divergence of implicit and explicit attitude measures.
Conclusion
The divergence between implicit and explicit attitude measures is a well-documented phenomenon influenced by various factors, including the type of behavior being predicted, the stability of the measures over time, the structural fit of the tests, and individual differences. Understanding these divergences is crucial for accurately interpreting attitude measures and their implications for behavior.
Sources and full results
Most relevant research papers on this topic