The individual-level precision of implicit measures

Implicit measures are used extensively in psychological science. One fundamental goal of these measures is to provide information diagnostic of an individual's attitudes or beliefs. After 25 years of research, this goal has not been achieved. We argue that this is because psychologists have not yet even quantified the individual-level precision of implicit measures, much less calibrated them to it. In this paper, we examine the individual-level precision of six different implicit measures across three different attitude domains (race, politics, and self-esteem) using a very large open dataset. Despite some variation, we find that there is substantial room for improvement for the precision of implicit measures as measures of individual attitudes. We recommend that researchers who wish to make theoretical inferences about individuals directly quantify individual-level precision to calibrate their tasks appropriately, both in the context of implicit measures and with tasks in psychological science more broadly.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavior Research Methods
Published
2025-12-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02873-2
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The individual-level precision of implicit measures

Ian Hussey, J. David Cummins
Behavior Research Methods
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

The individual-level precision of implicit measures

Ian Hussey, J. David Cummins
article en

Abstract

Implicit measures are used extensively in psychological science. One fundamental goal of these measures is to provide information diagnostic of an individual's attitudes or beliefs. After 25 years of research, this goal has not been achieved. We argue that this is because psychologists have not yet even quantified the individual-level precision of implicit measures, much less calibrated them to it. In this paper, we examine the individual-level precision of six different implicit measures across three different attitude domains (race, politics, and self-esteem) using a very large open dataset. Despite some variation, we find that there is substantial room for improvement for the precision of implicit measures as measures of individual attitudes. We recommend that researchers who wish to make theoretical inferences about individuals directly quantify individual-level precision to calibrate their tasks appropriately, both in the context of implicit measures and with tasks in psychological science more broadly.

Behavior Research MethodsVol. 58(1)
University of Bern (CH), Bern University of Applied Sciences (CH), Universidad Iberoamericana (DO), Science Oxford (GB)
University of Bern, Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.