Strong Claims and Weak Evidence: Reassessing the Predictive Validity of the IAT

Hart Blanton, James Jaccard, Jonathan Klick, Barbara Mellers, Gregory Mitchell, Philip E. Tetlock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


The authors reanalyzed data from 2 influential studies-A. R. McConnell and J. M. Leibold (2001) and J. C. Ziegert and P. J. Hanges (2005)-that explore links between implicit bias and discriminatory behavior and that have been invoked to support strong claims about the predictive validity of the Implicit Association Test. In both of these studies, the inclusion of race Implicit Association Test scores in regression models reduced prediction errors by only tiny amounts, and Implicit Association Test scores did not permit prediction of individual-level behaviors. Furthermore, the results were not robust when the impact of rater reliability, statistical specifications, and/or outliers were taken into account, and reanalysis of A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold (2001) revealed a pattern of behavior consistent with a pro-Black behavioral bias, rather than the anti-Black bias suggested in the original study.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)567-582
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 2009


  • Implicit Association Test
  • discrimination
  • implicit bias
  • predictive validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Strong Claims and Weak Evidence: Reassessing the Predictive Validity of the IAT'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this