Transparency Should Trump Trust: Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009)

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The rebuttals offered by the authors whose data we reanalyzed (A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold, 2001; J. C. Ziegert & P. J. Hanges, 2005) address secondary issues that do not alter our primary message: The evidence for the predictive validity of the race Implicit Association Test is too fragile to support the strong claims that have been made about the pervasiveness of prejudice and the linkages between Implicit Association Test scores and discriminatory behavior. Greater caution in both the legal and scientific communities is warranted. Most importantly, scientific research on implicit bias needs greater transparency and willingness to open raw data to critical scrutiny, not greater trust and deference among researchers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)598-603
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Volume94
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2009

Keywords

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

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Transparency Should Trump Trust: Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this