Resumo
The present research aimed to develop and produce evidence of the validity of an Implicit Association Test (IAT) for BJW. Two studies were developed to achieve this objective. Study 1 tested the convergent validity of a preliminary version of an IAT with an explicit measure (Global Belief in Just World Scale). The sample consisted of 119 participants who took part via the internet. After adjustments of the preliminary version, two IATs were developed, one for the general dimension (G-IAT) and another for the personal dimension of BJW (P-IAT). Both implicit measures and the explicit BJW measure were applied to 139 participants in a study conducted online. Both IATs demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and only the G-IAT correlates with the GBJWS as hypothesized.Referências
References
Bar-Anan, Y., & Nosek, B. (2012). A Comparative Investigation of Seven Implicit Measures of Social Cognition. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–60. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2074556
Bègue, L., Charmoillaux, M., Cochet, J., Cury, C., & De Suremain, F. (2008). Altruistic behavior and the bidimensional just world belief. The American Journal of Psychology, 121, 47–56. doi: 10.2307/20445443
Callan, M. J., Ferguson, H. J., & Bindemann, M. (2013). Eye movements to audiovisual scenes reveal expectations of a just world. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 142, 34–40. doi:10.1037/a0028261
Correia, I., & Vala, J. (2003). When will a victim be secondarily victimized? The effect of observer’s belief in a just world, victim’s innocence and persistence of suffering. Social Justice Research, 16, 379–400. doi: 10.1023/A:1026313716185
Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: about the personal belief in a just world scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12, 79–98. doi:10.1023/A:1022091609047
Dalbert, C., Lipkus, I. M., Sallay, H., & Goch, I. (2001). A just and an unjust world: structure and validity of different world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 561-577. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00055-6.
Fiedler, K., Messner, C., & Bluemke, M. (2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 74–147. doi:10.1080/10463280600681248
Fleischhauer, M., Strobel, A., Enge, S., & Strobel, A. (2013). Assessing implicit cognitive motivation : developing and testing an Implicit Association Test to measure Need for Cognition. European Journal of Personality, 27, 15–29. doi: 10.1002/per.1841
Furnham, A. (1993). Just World Beliefs in Twelve Societies. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 317–329. doi:10.1080/00224545.1993.9712149
Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 795–817. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00072-7
Gouveia, V. V., Pimentel, C. E., Coelho, J. A. P. de M., Maynart, V. A. P., & Mendonça, T. dos S. (2010). Validade fatorial confirmatória e consistência interna da Escala Global de Crenças no Mundo Justo – GJWS. Interação Em Psicologia, 14(1), 21–29. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/psi.v14i1.12687
Greenwald, A. G., Mcghee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. a., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
Hafer, C. L. (2000). Do innocent victims threaten the belief in a just world? Evidence from a modified Stroop Task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 165–173. doi:10.1037/AW22-3514.79.2.165
Hafer, C. L., & Rubel, A. N. (2015). The why and how of defending belief in a just world. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 41–96. doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2014.09.001.
Lane, K. A., Banaji, M. R., Greenwald, A. G., & Nosek, B. A. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test IV: what we know (so far ) about the method. In B. Wittenbrink & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 59–102). New York: The Guilford Press.
Lerner, M. J. (1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer’s reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 355–360. doi:10.1037/h0021806
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion. New York: Plennum Press.
Lerner, M. J. (1998). The two forms of belief in a just world: some thoughts on why and how people care about justice. In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 247–270). New York: Plenum Press.
Lerner, M. J. (2003). The justice motive: Where social psychologists found it, how they lost it, and why they may not find it again. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 388-399. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0704_10
Lerner, M. J., & Goldberg, J. H. (1999). When do decent people blame victims? The differing effects of the explicit/rational and implicit/experiential cognitive systems. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 627-640). New York: Guilford.
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.85.5.1030
Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). The observer’s reaction to the “innocent victim”: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203–210. doi:10.1037/h0023562
Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171-1178. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(91)90081-L
Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The Importance of Distinguishing the Belief in a Just World for Self Versus for Others: Implications for Psychological Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 666–677. doi:10.1177/0146167296227002
Mendonça, R. D., Gouveia-Pereira, M., & Miranda, M. (2016). Belief in a Just World and secondary victimization: The role of adolescent deviant behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 82-87. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.021
Modesto, J. G., Figueredo, V., Gama, G., Rodrigues, M., & Pilati, R. (In press). Escala pessoal de crenças no mundo justo: adaptação e evidências de validade. Psico-USF, 22 (1), 1-25.
Murray, J. D., Spadafore, J. A., & McIntosh, W. D. (2005). Belief in a Just World and social perception: Evidence from automatic activation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 35–47. doi:10.3200/SOCP.145.1.35-48
Nosek, B. a., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review. Social psychology and the unconscious (pp. 265–291). New York: Psychology Press.
Nosek, B. a, Hawkins, C. B., & Frazier, R. S. (2011). Implicit social cognition: From measures to mechanisms. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 152–9. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.005
Oliveira, N. R., Janczura, G. A., & Castilho, G. M. (2013). Normas de Alerta e Valência para 908 Palavras da Língua Portuguesa. Psicologia: Teoria E Pesquisa, 29(3), 185–200. Retrieved from: https://revistaptp.unb.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/715
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65–89. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb00997.x
Simmons, C. W., & Piliavin, J. A. (1972). Effects of deception on reactions to a victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(1), 56–60. doi: 10.1037/h0031942
Testé, B., & Perrin, S. (2013). The impact of endorsing the belief in a just world on social judgments: the social utility and social desirability of Just-World Beliefs for self and others. Social Psychology, 44, 209–218. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000105
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work [SPECIFY PERIOD OF TIME] after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).