Methodological issues in the validation of implicit measures: comment on De Houwer, Teige-Mocigemba, Spruyt, and Moors (2009).

Full Abstract

J. De Houwer, S. Teige-Mocigemba, A. Spruyt, and A. Moors's normative analysis of implicit measures provides an excellent clarification of several conceptual ambiguities surrounding the validation and use of implicit measures. The current comment discusses an important, yet unacknowledged, implication of J. De Houwer et al.'s analysis, namely, that investigations addressing the proposed implicitness criterion (i.e., does the relevant psychological attribute influence measurement outcomes in an automatic fashion?) will be susceptible to fundamental misinterpretations if they are conducted independently of the proposed what criterion (i.e., is the measurement outcome causally produced by the psychological attribute the measurement procedure was designed to assess?). As a solution, it is proposed that experimental validation studies should be combined with a correlational approach in order to determine whether a given manipulation influenced measurement scores via variations in the relevant psychological attribute or via secondary sources of systematic variance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

Author information

Author/s: Gawronski, Bertram (B); Lebel, Etienne P (EP); Peters, Kurt R (KR); Banse, Rainer (R);

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, Canada. bgawrons(-atsign-)uwo.ca

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Comment; Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Journal: Psychological bulletin (Psychol Bull), published in United States. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2009-May; vol 135 (issue 3) : pp 369-72

Dates: Created 2009/04/21; Completed 2009/06/24;

PMID: 19379019, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 6/24/2009, IMS Date: 24 Jun 2009 00:00:00)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

Comments and Corrections

CommentOn: Psychol Bull. 2009 May;135(3):347-68. (PMID: 19379018)

CommentIn: Psychol Bull. 2009 May;135(3):377-9. (PMID: 19379021)

External Links for this article
(including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

This article has not been indexed for related articles as yet, however you can still use the live related article search links below.

See 100+ related articles.

See a large map of 100+ related articles.