Dissociating automatic associations: Comparing two implicit measurements of race bias

Abstract

Weak correspondence across different implicit bias tasks may arise from the contribution of unique forms of automatic and controlled processes to response behavior. Here, we examined the correspondence between estimates of automatic and controlled processing derived from two sequential priming tasks with identical structure and timing designed to separately measure stereotypic (Weapons Identification Task; WIT) and evaluative (Affective Priming Task; APT) associations. Across two studies using predominantly White samples, three consistent patterns emerged in the data: (a) stereotypic bias was stronger for Black targets, whereas evaluative bias was stronger for White targets; (b) overall response accuracy bias correlated modestly across the two tasks; and (c) multinomial processing tree estimates of controlled processing corresponded much more strongly than estimates of automatic processing. These findings support models positing distinct learning and memory systems for different forms of race bias, and suggest that these differing forms contribute to estimates of automatic associations.