Test validity

Cognitive psychology

Biology

Construct (python library)

Social psychology

Discriminant validity

Implicit-association test

Accounting

Developmental psychology

Computer science

Psychometrics

Face validity

Business

Paleontology

Predictive validity

Test (biology)

Construct validity

Variance (accounting)

Psychology

Incremental validity

Concurrent validity

Programming language

Criterion validity

Internal consistency

Perspectives on Psychological Science

In 1998, Greenwald, McGhee, and Schwartz proposed that the Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures individual differences in implicit social cognition. This claim requires evidence of construct validity. I review the evidence and show that there is insufficient evidence for this claim. Most important, I show that few studies were able to test discriminant validity of the IAT as a measure of implicit constructs. I examine discriminant validity in several multimethod studies and find little or no evidence of discriminant validity. I also show that validity of the IAT as a measure of attitudes varies across constructs. Validity of the self-esteem IAT is low, but estimates vary across studies. About 20% of the variance in the race IAT reflects racial preferences. The highest validity is obtained for measuring political orientation with the IAT (64%). Most of this valid variance stems from a distinction between individuals with opposing attitudes, whereas reaction times contribute less than 10% of variance in the prediction of explicit attitude measures. In all domains, explicit measures are more valid than the IAT, but the IAT can be used as a measure of sensitive attitudes to reduce measurement error by using a multimethod measurement model.

The Implicit Association Test: A Method in Search of a Construct