The IRAP Is Nonrelative but not Acontextual: Changes to the Contrast Category Influence Men’s Dehumanization of Women
- 152 Downloads
The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) is frequently employed over other measures of so-called implicit attitudes because it produces 4 independent and “nonrelative” bias scores, thereby providing greater clarity around what drives an effect. Indeed, studies have sometimes emphasized the procedural separation of the four trial types by choosing to report only the results of a single, theoretically meaningful trial type. However, no research to date has examined the degree to which performance on a given trial type is impacted upon by other stimulus categories employed within the task. The current study examined the extent to which response biases toward “women” are influenced by two different contrast categories: “men” versus “inanimate objects.” Results indicated that greater dehumanization of women was observed in the context of the latter relative to the former category. The findings highlight that the IRAP may be described as a nonrelative, but not acontextual, measure of brief and immediate relational responses.
KeywordsImplicit Relational Assessment Procedure Relational Frame Theory Dehumanization of women
Compliance with Ethical Standards
The first author was supported by a Government of Ireland Scholarship from the Irish Research Council.
Conflict of Interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Stewart, I., & Boles, S. (2010). A sketch of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) and the Relational Elaboration and Coherence (REC) model. The Psychological Record, 60, 527–542.Google Scholar
- Barnes-Holmes, D., Hayden, E., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2008). The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) as a response-time and event-related-potentials methodology for testing natural verbal relations: A preliminary study. The Psychological Record, 58(4), 497–516.Google Scholar
- Barnes-Holmes, D., & Hussey, I. (2016). The functional-cognitive meta-theoretical framework: Reflections, possible clarifications and how to move forward. International Journal of Psychology, 51(1), 50–57. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12166.
- Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Bortoloti, R., & de Rose, J. C. (2012). Equivalent stimuli are more strongly related after training with delayed matching than after simultaneous matching: A study using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). Psychological Record, 62(1), 41–54.Google Scholar
- Dawson, D. L., Barnes-Holmes, D., Gresswell, D. M., Hart, A. J., & Gore, N. J. (2009). Assessing the implicit beliefs of sexual offenders using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure: A first study. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21(1), 57–75. doi: 10.1177/1079063208326928.Google Scholar
- De Houwer, J., & Moors, A. (2010). Implicit measures: Similarities and differences. In B. Gawronski & B. K. Payne (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 176–193). New York, NY: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
- Drake, C. E., Kramer, S., Habib, R., Schuler, K., Blankenship, L., & Locke, J. (2015). Honest politics: Evaluating candidate perceptions for the 2012 U.S. election with the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 4(2), 129–138. doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2015.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Foody, M., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2012). The role of self in acceptance and commitment therapy. In L. McHugh & I. Stewart (Eds.), The self and perspective taking: Research and applications (pp. 125–142). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
- Glick, P., Lameiras, M., Fiske, S. T., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C., . . . Wells, R. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 713–728. doi: 10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.1243.
- Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2011). On the formation and persistence of implicit attitudes: New evidence from the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). The Psychological Record, 61, 391–410.Google Scholar
- Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2016). Relational Frame Theory: The basic account. In R. D. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & A. Biglan (Eds.), Handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 129–178). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & De Houwer, J. (2011). The dominance of associative theorizing in implicit attitude research: Propositional and behavioral alternatives. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 465–498.Google Scholar
- Remue, J., De Houwer, J., Barnes-Holmes, D., Vanderhasselt, M. A., & De Raedt, R. (2013). Self-esteem revisited: Performance on the implicit relational assessment procedure as a measure of self-versus ideal self-related cognitions in dysphoria. Cognition & Emotion, 27(8), 1441–1449. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2013.786681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rönspies, J., Schmidt, A. F., Melnikova, A., Krumova, R., Zolfagari, A., & Banse, R. (2015). Indirect measurement of sexual orientation: Comparison of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure, viewing time, and choice reaction time tasks. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(5), 1483–1492. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0473-1.
- Vahey, N. A., Boles, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2010). Measuring adolescents’ smoking-related social identity preferences with the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) for the first time: A starting point that explains later IRAP evolutions. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 10(3), 453–474.Google Scholar
- Vahey, N. A., Nicholson, E., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2015). A meta-analysis of criterion effects for the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) in the clinical domain. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 48, 59–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.01.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar