Not all implicit measures of attitudes are created equal: Evidence from an embodiment perspective

We hypothesize that while evaluative priming involves proprioceptive cues, the IAT is representational due to its structural features and the specific algorithm upon which the IAT-effect rests. As predicted, evaluative priming is shown to rely on differential facial muscle activity while the IAT as a measurement instrument is not influenced by proprioceptive information. Evaluative priming does not yield differential responsiveness for congruent and incongruent trials when facial muscle activity is inhibited whereas the IAT-effect is shown to be impervious to such inhibition. Implications for the underlying mechanisms of implicit measures are discussed.

►We explore two implicit measures of attitudes toward social groups. ►We compare evaluative priming and implicit attitude test with an embodied perspective. ►Evaluative priming relies on differential facial muscle activity: Proprioceptive cues. ►Implicit attitude test is not influenced by proprioceptive information. ►These two measures assess different aspects of the attitudes toward social groups.