B.Govronski,F.Sirack Journal of Experin al Social Psychology 40(2004)535-542 (German equivalent for appearing for 1000ms below the center o and SD of explicit and implicit attitudes toward alcoholi 、2 beverages asa function of essay assignment conditions,Experiment1 Induced Forced Control Results Explicit attitudes SD 6 Explicit attitude ratings were merged into a single Implicit titude index of explicit negative attitudes toward alcoholic bever by ating Note.Higher values indicate more negative attitudes. attitude ording to the procedures described by Greenwald et al.(1998).Response latencies lowe squalified by a sig- 300ms were trial 、1.aa1 two-way mter05o2o_indicatin。CyPe, .13.indicating that im subtracting the mean response time of the reversed ve when 10a ed aft ather than be. fore explicit attitudes Most importantly.there was a latency of the n high significant two-wa e type and es 2. 02 IAT nce F581-44 from-382 to +858 ms (M SD .01,explicit attitudes were most negativ under I(se nduce nce cond ,m0 der lorce combined blocks were each divided into three c conditions F(2.58)=7.74. tive parts of equal length (i.e.,40 trials).The three thirds 21.Plannc contrasts for explicit attitudes revealed significant dif were then use three IA ferences between all of the three conditions (all ps<.05). tency o mplicit Overall.explicit and implicit attitudes were moder- n order to t the nance manipula ately correlated (r =.26,p =.04).Consistent with ou yp we atio driv by and then submitted to a 2(attitude type)x 3(essa signment)2 (or .05).There was no significant correlation between TA r XD and implicit attituc under indu P= between-subiects factors.This analysis revealed a sig from both forced position,=1.86,p=.03,and con- trol co =1.70,p=.04.There was no signifi an orced position and contro 5 of the Discussion i,2002 Results from Ex that IAT in for ou titud. changes are inherently propositional.Consistent with ants have an ed in an ab ofalcohol sign a with the word ‘‘FEHLER!’’ (German equivalent for ‘‘ERROR!’’) appearing for 1000 ms below the center of the screen.2 Results Preliminary analyses Explicit attitude ratings were merged into a single index of explicit negative attitudes toward alcoholic beverages by calculating mean values (Cronbach
s a ¼ :62, M ¼ 2:59, SD ¼ :91). IAT-scores for implicit attitudes toward alcoholic beverages were calculated according to the procedures described by Greenwald et al. (1998). Response latencies lower than 300 ms were recoded to 300 ms, and latencies higher than 3000 ms were recoded to 3000 ms. Error trials were excluded from analyses. Individual IAT-scores were calculated by subtracting the mean response time of the reversed combined task (Block 5) from the mean latency of the initial combined task (Block 3), with higher values in￾dicating an implicit preference for non-alcoholic as compared to alcoholic beverages. IAT-scores ranged from –382 to +858 ms (M ¼ 244, SD ¼ 234).3 In order to estimate the reliability of the IAT (see Gawronski, Eh￾renberg, Banse, Zukova, & Klauer, 2003a), the two combined blocks were each divided into three consecu￾tive parts of equal length (i.e., 40 trials). The three thirds were then used to calculate three IAT-scores for each participant, which revealed an internal consistency of .90 (Cronbach
s a). Cognitive dissonance In order to test the effects of dissonance manipula￾tions on explicit and implicit attitudes, the respective indices were first standardized by a z-transformation and then submitted to a 2 (attitude type)
3 (essay as￾signment)
2 (order of attitude measurement) mixed￾model analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the first variable as a within-subjects factor and the other two as between-subjects factors. This analysis revealed a sig￾nificant main effect of order, F ð1; 58Þ ¼ 4:97, p ¼ :03, g2 ¼ :08, indicating that attitudes toward alcoholic beverages were more negative when explicit attitudes were assessed first than when implicit attitudes were assessed first. This main effect was qualified by a sig￾nificant two-way interaction of order and attitude type, F ð1; 58Þ ¼ 8:41, p ¼ :005, g2 ¼ :13, indicating that im￾plicit attitudes toward alcoholic beverages were more negative when they were assessed after rather than be￾fore explicit attitudes. Most importantly, there was a significant two-way interaction of attitude type and es￾say assignment, F ð2; 58Þ ¼ 7:23, p ¼ :002, g2 ¼ :20 (see Table 1). Whereas implicit attitudes were unaffected by dissonance manipulations, F ð2; 58Þ ¼ :44, p ¼ :64, g2 ¼ :01, explicit attitudes were most negative under induced compliance conditions, moderate under forced position conditions, and least negative under control conditions, F ð2; 58Þ ¼ 7:74, p ¼ :001, g2 ¼ :21. Planned contrasts for explicit attitudes revealed significant dif￾ferences between all of the three conditions (all ps<.05).4 Implicit–explicit correlations Overall, explicit and implicit attitudes were moder￾ately correlated (r ¼ :26, p ¼ :04). Consistent with our hypotheses, however, this correlation was driven by particularly pronounced correlations under forced po￾sition (r ¼ :46, p ¼ :02) and control conditions (r ¼ :44, p ¼ :05). There was no significant correlation between explicit and implicit attitudes under induced compliance conditions (r ¼ :11, p ¼ :64). The correlation obtained for induced compliance conditions differed significantly from both forced position, z ¼ 1:86, p ¼ :03, and con￾trol conditions, z ¼ 1:70, p ¼ :04. There was no signifi- cant difference between forced position and control conditions, z ¼ :08, p ¼ :53. Discussion Results from Experiment 1 offer preliminary evidence for our assumption that dissonance-related attitude changes are inherently propositional. Consistent with 2 Because one of the main goals of the present studies was to test predictions about the relation between explicit and implicit attitudes, we deliberately decided not to counterbalance the order of the two combined blocks (for a discussion, see Gawronski, 2002). 3 One could argue that IAT-scores in the present study were generally positive, and hence indicate a negative rather than a positive implicit attitude toward alcoholic beverages. However, since the IAT assesses only relative rather than absolute attitudes, a positive IAT￾score indicates only that participants have an implicit preference for non-alcoholic as compared to alcoholic beverages. Moreover, recent research indicates that IAT-scores cannot be interpreted in an absolute manner, because the overall size of IAT-scores is affected not only by category associations, but also by contingent stimulus factors (e.g., Mitchell, Nosek, & Banaji, 2003; Steffens & Plewe, 2001). Table 1 Means and SD of explicit and implicit attitudes toward alcoholic beverages as a function of essay assignment conditions, Experiment 1 Induced compliance Forced position Control condition Explicit attitudes M 3.10 2.58 2.07 SD .90 .76 .83 Implicit attitudes M 211 272 242 SD 139 246 296 Note. Higher values indicate more negative attitudes. 4 Separate analyses for the two explicit items revealed correspond￾ing effects for attitudes toward a general prohibition of alcoholic beverages, F ð2; 58Þ ¼ 3:37, p ¼ :04, g2 ¼ :10, as well as for willingness to sign a petition in favor of a general prohibition of alcoholic beverages, F ð2; 58Þ ¼ 7:65, p ¼ :001, g2 ¼ :21. 538 B. Gawronski, F. Strack / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40 (2004) 535–542