Meta-Analytic Use of Balanced Identity Theory to Validate the Implicit Association Test.

This meta-analysis evaluated theoretical predictions from balanced identity theory (BIT) and evaluated the validity of zero points of Implicit Association Test (IAT) and self-report measures used to test these predictions. Twenty-one researchers contributed individual subject data from 36 experiments (total N = 12,773) that used both explicit and implicit measures of the social-cognitive constructs. The meta-analysis confirmed predictions of BIT's balance-congruity principle and simultaneously validated interpretation of the IAT's zero point as indicating absence of preference between two attitude objects. Statistical power afforded by the sample size enabled the first confirmations of balance-congruity predictions with self-report measures. Beyond these empirical results, the meta-analysis introduced a within-study statistical test of the balance-congruity principle, finding that it had greater efficiency than the previous best method. The meta-analysis's full data set has been publicly archived to enable further studies of interrelations among attitudes, stereotypes, and identities.

Implicit partisanship: taking sides for no reason.

After spending 45 s studying the names of 4 members of a hypothetical group, subjects showed both implicit liking and implicit identification with the group. These effects of studying names were much larger than the mere exposure (R. B. Zajonc, 1968) effects of either 6 (Experiment 2) or 10 (Experiment 3) extra exposures to each name. This implicit partisanship effect differs from the minimal group effect (H. Tajfel, 1970) because its procedure involves no membership in the target group. It also differs from the mere exposure effect because the target stimuli are presented once as members of a group rather than multiple times as unrelated individuals. A plausible (but not established) interpretation is that the attitude and identification effects are consequences of mere categorization.

Emotional responses to changing feedback: is it better to have won and lost than never to have won at all?

Two experiments investigated how self-esteem guides people's emotional responses to changing evaluative feedback. In both experiments, participants received an initial evaluation (either positive or negative) followed by a second evaluation (either positive or negative). Emotional reactions to the second evaluation were then assessed. High self-esteem participants found feedback that was consistently negative to be most distressing, whereas low self-esteem participants were most disturbed by feedback that changed from positive to negative. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept.

This theoretical integration of social psychology's main cognitive and affective constructs was shaped by 3 influences: (a) recent widespread interest in automatic and implicit cognition, (b) development of the Implicit Association Test (IAT; A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz. 1998), and (c) social psychology's consistency theories of the 1950s, especially F. Heider's (1958) balance theory. The balanced identity design is introduced as a method to test correlational predictions of the theory. Data obtained with this method revealed that predicted consistency patterns were strongly apparent in the data for implicit (IAT) measures but not in those for parallel explicit (self-report) measures. Two additional not-yet-tested predictions of the theory are described.