The sample

164 participants from the University of Tartu and the University of Tallinn

Overview of the data

IAT results
The distirbution of IAT results:

The mean values of IAT tests:

  mean sdandard deviation
SB-IAT Neuroticism -0.1 0.3
SB-IAT Extraversion 0.17 0.36
Standard IAT Extraversion 0.19 0.45
Standard IAT Neuroticism -0.49 0.36

The distribution of slef-report measures

The mean values of extraversion and neuroticsism:

  mean sdandard deviation
Extraversion 0.24 0.34
Neuroticsism -0.22 0.38

Correlation between implicit and explicit measures

  Extraversion Neuroticsism
SB_IAT_N -0.1213 0.1158
SB_IAT_E 0.1983 -0.2467
Standard_IAT_E 0.5812 -0.2644
Standard_IAT_N -0.1275 0.1781

Explicit extraversion was correlated with both extraversion implicit measures:

Explicit neuroticisim wasn’t correlated with implicit neuroticisim measures, but there was a significant correlation with implicit extraversion measures:

Correlation between explicit measures

How to explaine the results that implicit neuroticsim measures were correlated with implicit extraversion measures?

This can be explained by the fact that in our sample explicit extraversion and explicit neuroticisim were correlated (r = -.40, p < 0.05).

Correlations between different IAT variations

  SB_IAT_N SB_IAT_E Standard_IAT_E Standard_IAT_N
SB_IAT_N 1 -0.05 0.02 -0.02
SB_IAT_E 1 0.15 -0.29
Standard_IAT_E 1 -0.28
Standard_IAT_N 1

We expected do see correlations between implicit measures that measured the same construct:

There was no significant correlation between the IAT variations that measured the same construct.

But we found significant correlations between neuroticisim Standard IAT measure with the two extraversion IAT’s:

This too can be explained by the correlation between the two explicit measures.

Conclusion

We expected to see correlation between implicit and explicit measures. This was partially true:

We expected to see correlations between different types of IAT’s which measured the same construct. There was no correlation.