BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In their paper, "Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm", Greenwald, Nosek, and Banaji (2003) investigated different ways to calculate the IAT-effect. However, up to now, it remained unclear whether these findings - based on internet data - also generalize to laboratory settings. Therefore, the main goal of the present study was to cross-validate scoring algorithms for the IAT in a laboratory setting, specifically in the domain of psychopathology. METHODS: Four known IAT algorithms and seven alternative IAT algorithms were evaluated on several performance criteria in the large-scale laboratory sample of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (N = 2981) in which two IATs were included to obtain measurements of automatic self-anxious and automatic self-depressed associations. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results clearly demonstrated that the D(2SD)-measure and the D(600)-measure as well as an alternative algorithm based on the correct trials only (D(noEP)-measure) are suitable to be used in a laboratory setting for IATs with a fixed order of category combinations. It remains important to further replicate these findings, especially in studies that include outcome measures of more spontaneous kinds of behaviors.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In their paper, "Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm", Greenwald, Nosek, and Banaji (2003) investigated different ways to calculate the IAT-effect. However, up to now, it remained unclear whether these findings - based on internet data - also generalize to laboratory settings. Therefore, the main goal of the present study was to cross-validate scoring algorithms for the IAT in a laboratory setting, specifically in the domain of psychopathology. METHODS: Four known IAT algorithms and seven alternative IAT algorithms were evaluated on several performance criteria in the large-scale laboratory sample of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (N = 2981) in which two IATs were included to obtain measurements of automatic self-anxious and automatic self-depressed associations. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results clearly demonstrated that the D(2SD)-measure and the D(600)-measure as well as an alternative algorithm based on the correct trials only (D(noEP)-measure) are suitable to be used in a laboratory setting for IATs with a fixed order of category combinations. It remains important to further replicate these findings, especially in studies that include outcome measures of more spontaneous kinds of behaviors.
Authors: Maddalena Marini; Natarajan Sriram; Konrad Schnabel; Norbert Maliszewski; Thierry Devos; Bo Ekehammar; Reinout Wiers; Cai HuaJian; Mónika Somogyi; Kimihiro Shiomura; Simone Schnall; Félix Neto; Yoav Bar-Anan; Michelangelo Vianello; Alfonso Ayala; Gabriel Dorantes; Jaihyun Park; Selin Kesebir; Antonio Pereira; Bogdan Tulbure; Tuulia Ortner; Irena Stepanikova; Anthony G Greenwald; Brian A Nosek Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lonneke A van Tuijl; Klaske A Glashouwer; Claudi L H Bockting; Jorge N Tendeiro; Brenda W J H Penninx; Peter J de Jong Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Birte Vogel; Patrick Trotzke; Sabine Steins-Loeber; Giulia Schäfer; Jana Stenger; Martina de Zwaan; Matthias Brand; Astrid Müller Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Rozemarijn S van Kleef; Claudi L H Bockting; Evelien van Valen; André Aleman; Jan-Bernard C Marsman; Marie-José van Tol Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Anne-Wil Kruijt; Niki Antypa; Linda Booij; Peter J de Jong; Klaske Glashouwer; Brenda W J H Penninx; Willem Van der Does Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-07-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sizwe Zondo; Jacques van Lankveld; Chris R Kenyon; Kenny Wolfs; Kara Osbak; Maleeto Malataliana; Guido Van Hal Journal: F1000Res Date: 2018-05-17