Сравнительный анализ имплицитных измерений ГАТО и IAT: единство в многообразии
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2023.5.2413Ключевые слова:
теория социального действия, структурная теория установки, теория двойственной системы, подход рационального действия, теория культурной эволюции, графический ассоциативный тест отношения, тест имплицитного отношения, ГАТО, DST, RAA, IATАннотация
Статья посвящена анализу результатов методического эксперимента, основанного на сопоставлении результатов измерений тестов Графического ассоциативного теста отношения (ГАТО) и Implicit Association Test (IAT). Оба они претендуют на измерение имплицитного (то есть неосознаваемого) «ментального содержания», и каждый из них имеет определенные проблемы с конструктной валидностью. Планируя эксперимент, авторы статьи предположили, что совпадение результатов измерений укажет если не на единство, то на некоторую степень сходства предмета измерения тестов, и таким образом будет внесен вклад в концептуализацию предмета измерения каждого из них.
Результаты эксперимента выглядят противоречивыми. С одной стороны, он не выявил никаких фактов, ставящих под сомнение валидность ГАТО как инструмента имплицитных измерений. С другой стороны, полученные данные указывают на то, что сравниваемые методики имеют тенденцию диагностировать существенно различающиеся аспекты «ментального содержания». Возникли эмпирические основания предположить, что IAT отображает преимущественно устоявшееся ядро социальной установки, которое в силу рутинизации уже не рефлексируется, в то время как ГАТО обладает также и способностью улавливать самые первые признаки изменений, которые носят характер имплицитных как раз в силу того, что еще не рефлексируются.
Библиографические ссылки
Чернозуб О. Л. (2018) Выявление аффективной компоненты электоральной установки: создание и валидизация графического ассоциативного теста отношения // Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены. No 3. С. 3—28. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2018.3.01
Chernozub O. L. (2018) Affective Components of Electoral Behavior: Design and Validity of Visual Association Test of Attitude. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 3. P. 3—28. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2018.3.01.
Ajzen I. (1991) The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Vol. 50. No. 2. P. 179-211.
Auyero J., Swistun D. (2008) The Social Production of Toxic Uncertainty. American Sociological Review. Vol. 73. P. 357–379.
Bandura A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Baumeister R. (2002) Yielding to Temptation: Self-Control Failure, Impulsive Purchasing, and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 28. No. 4. P. 670-676.
Chernozub O. L. (2020) Implicit Factors and Voting Behaviour Inconsistency: From Theoretical Concept to Empirical Phenomenon. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 4. P. 17—40. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.4.1584.
Chernozub O. L. (2022a) The Two-Component Model of Behavior Factors: Evidences of Orthogonality of Explicit and Implicit Factors. RUDN Journal of Sociology. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 70-83. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-1-70-83.
Chernozub O. L. (2022b) Theory of (Un)Planned Behavior? How our behavioral predictions suffer from “unplanned” actions. The Russian Sociological Review. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 82-105. https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2022-4-82-105.
Evans J. (2008) Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology. Vol. 59. P. 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629.
Fazio R. (1990). The Role of Attitudes in Memory-Based Decision Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 59. No. 4. P.614-22. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.4.614.
Fazio R. (2007) Attitudes as Object-Evaluation Associations of Varying Strength. Social Cognition. Vol. 25. No. 5. P. 603–637. https://doi.org 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603.
Fazio R., Olson M. (2014) The MODE Model: Attitude-Behavior Processes as a Function of Motivation and Opportunity. In: Dual Process Theories of the Social Mind. New York: Guilford Press. P. 155–171.
Fishbein M. (1967). Attitude and the Prediction of Behavior. In: Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: Wiley. P. 477–492.
Fishbein M., Ajzen I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fishbein M., Ajzen I. (2011) Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Friedman M., Savage L.J. (1948) Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk. Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 56. No. 4. P. 279—304.
Gawronski B., Hahn A. (2019) Implicit Measures: Procedures, Use, and Interpretation. In: H. Blanton, J. M. LaCroix, G. D. Webster (eds.) Foundations of Social Psychological Measurement. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. P. 29-55.
Gibbons F., Gerrard M., Blanton H., Russell D. (1998) Reasoned Action and Social Reaction: Willingness and Intention as Independent Predictors of Health Risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 74. No. 5. P. 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1164.
Gilovich T., Griffin D. (2002) Introduction—Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now. In: T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (eds.) Heuristic and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. P. 1–18.
Goldstein D., Gigerenzer G. (2002) Models of Ecological Rationality: The Recognition Heuristic. Psychological Review. Vol. 109. No. 1. P. 75—90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.75.
Greenwald A., McGhee D. E., Schwartz J. L. K. (1998) Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 74. No. 6. P. 1464-1480.
Greenwald A.G., Poehlman T. A., Uhlmann E. L., Banaji M. R. (2009a). Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: Iii. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 97. No. 1. P. 17-41.
Greenwald A.G., Smith C.T., Sriram N., Bar-Anan Y., Nosek B.A. (2009b) Implicit Race Attitudes Predicted Vote in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. Vol. 9. No. 1. P. 241-253. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2009.01195.x.
Greenwald A.G., Brendl M., Cai H. et al. (2022) Best Research Practices for Using the Implicit Association Test. Behavior Research Methods. Vol. 54. No. 1161–1180. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01624-3.
Hofmann W., Friese M., Strack F. (2009) Impulse and Self-Control from a Dual-Systems Perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science. Vol. 4. No. 2. P. 162-176.
Janz N., Becker M. (1984) The Health Belief Model: A Decade Later. Health Education & Behavior. Vol. 11. No. 1. P. 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818401100101.
Kahneman D., Frederick S. (2002) Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment. In: T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (eds.) Heuristic and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. P. 49–81.
Kahneman D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Leschziner V. (2015) At the Chef’s Table: Culinary Creativity in Elite Restaurants. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Leschziner V. (2019) Dual-Process Models in Sociology. In: H. B.Wayne, G. Ignatow (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Sociology. Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190273385.013.10.
Leschziner V., Green A. (2013) Thinking about Food and Sex: Deliberate Cognition in the Routine Practices of a Field. Sociological Theory. Vol. 31. No. 2. P. 116–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275113489806.
Lizardo O., Mowry R., Sepulvado B., Stoltz D., Taylor M., Van Ness J., et al. (2016) What Are Dual Process Models? Implications for Cultural Analysis in Sociology. Sociological Theory. Vol. 34. No. 4. P. 287–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275116675900.
Lizardo O., Strand M. (2010) Skills, Toolkits, Contexts and Institutions: Clarifying the Relationship between Different Approaches to Cognition in Cultural Sociology. Poetics. Vol. 38. No. 2. P. 205–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2009.11.003.
Martin J. (2010) Life’s a Beach but You’re an Ant, and Other Unwelcome News for the Sociology of Culture. Poetics. Vol. 38. No. 2. P. 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2009.11.004.
Metcalfe J., Mischel W. (1999) A Hot/Cool-System Analysis of Delay of Gratification: Dynamics of Willpower. Psychological Review. Vol. 106. No. 1. P. 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.3.
Perugini M. (2005) Predictive Models of Implicit and Explicit Attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 44. No. 1. P. 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604X23491.
Perugini M., Richetin J., Zogmaister C. (2010) Prediction of Behavior. In: Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press. P. 255-278.
Rivers L., Gibbs C., Paternoster R. (2017) Integrating Criminological and Decision Research Theory: Implications for Understanding and Addressing Crime in Marginalized Communities. Deviant Behavior. Vol. 38. No. 1. P. 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1196948.
Roccato M., Zogmaister C. (2010) Predicting the Vote through Implicit and Explicit Attitudes: A Field Research. Political Psychology. Vol. 31. No. 2. P. 249-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00751.x.
Rogers R. (1975) A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change. The Journal of Psychology. Vol. 91. No. 1. P. 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803.
Rosenberg M.J. (1956) Cognitive Structure and Attitudinal Affect. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. Vol. 53. No. 3. P. 367—372. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044579.
Rosenberg M.J., Hovland C.I., McGuire W.J., Abelson R.P., Brehm J.W. (1960). Attitude Organization and Change: An Analysis of Consistency among Attitude Components. (Yales Studies in Attitude and Communication). Oxford: Yale University Press.
Shah A. K., Oppenheimer D. M. (2008) Heuristics Made Easy: An Effort-Reduction Framework. Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 134. No. 2. P. 207—222. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.207.
Smith М. В. (1968) Attitude Change. In: D. L. Sills (ed.) lnternational Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Macmillan, Free Press.
Smith E. R., DeCoster J. (2000) Dual-Process Models in Social and Cognitive Psychology: Conceptual Integration and Links to Underlying Memory Systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Vol. 4. No. 2. P. 108–131. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01.
Strack F., Deutsch R. (2004) Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Vol. 8. No. 3. P. 220-247.
Strack F., Neumann R. (2000) Furrowing the Brow May Undermine Perceived Fame: The Role of Facial Feedback in Judgments of Celebrity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 26. No. 7. P. 762–768.
Thaler R.H. (2015) Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
Vaisey S. (2009) Motivation and Justification: A Dual-Process Model of Culture in Action. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 114. No. 6. P. 1675–1715.
Vila-Henninger L. (2015) Toward Defining the Causal Role of Consciousness: Using Models of Memory and Moral Judgment from Cognitive Neuroscience to Expand the Sociological Dual-Process Model. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. Vol. 45. No. 2. P. 238–260.
Wood S., Bechara A. (2014) The Neuroscience of Dual (And Triple) System in Decision Making. In: V. Reyna, V. Zayas (eds.) The Neuroscience of Risky Decision Making. Washington, DC: American Psychological Assoication. P. 177-202.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Как цитировать
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2023 Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike» («Атрибуция — Некоммерческое использование — На тех же условиях») 4.0 Всемирная.
