|Extending the Applications of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP)
|Tuesday, May 27, 2008
|9:00 AM–10:20 AM
|Area: EAB; Domain: Basic Research
|Chair: Regan M. Slater (University of Mississippi)
|Abstract: Use of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) has flourished since its development as the first behavioral measure of relational responding. Variations in format, method, and analytic strategy have supported rapid development and adaptation of the procedure. The papers in this symposium consider implications for future applications of the procedure.
|Modifying the IRAP: Exploration of the Training Potential of a Testing Procedure.
|ROBERT C. MARTIN (University of Mississippi), Regan M. Slater (University of Mississippi), Rachel Lewis (University of Mississippi), Chad E. Drake (Veterans Affairs Hospital, Togus, Maine), Kate Kellum (University of Mississippi), Kelly G. Wilson (University of Mississippi)
|Abstract: This study utilized an IRAP modified to more closely resemble a Matching-to-Sample procedure.
|Evaluation of Values and IRAP.
|MONICA HERNANDEZ-LOPEZ (Universidad de Valladolid, Spain), Carmen Luciano Soriano (Universidad de Almería, Spain), Francisco Jose Ruiz-Jimenez (Universidad de Almería, Spain), Sonsoles Valdivia-Salas (Universidad de Almería, Spain)
|Abstract: Measures concerning how one is evaluated himself as well as how one evaluates his verbal regulation are usually taken by questionnaires or by the person reports to others. However, this information is biased by the social audience. The present study aims to evaluate values and verbal regulation comparing typical questionnaires and performance using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP).
|Stimulus Selection Procedures in the IRAP.
|GEORGE A. BALL (University of Mississippi), Georgia K. Fyke (University of Mississippi), Emily Kennison Sandoz (University of Mississippi), Chad E. Drake (Veterans Affairs Hospital, Togus, Maine), Kelly G. Wilson (University of Mississippi)
|Abstract: Traditionally the IRAP has relied on stimuli chosen by the experimenter based on either his own experience and reaction to particular words or their use in similar preparations. Recently, researchers have begun using stimuli selected for their ratings by individual participants or for their average ratings in a large sample from the population of interest. The current study aims to examine the effects of idiographic versus nomothetic approaches to stimulus selection on IRAP performance in a self-evaluative IRAP.
|Testing an Adaptation of the IRAP: Validation of a New Procedure for Assessing Implicit Relations.
|MICHAEL LEVIN (University of Nevada, Reno), Steven C. Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno), Thomas J. Waltz (University of Nevada, Reno), Roger Vilardaga (University of Nevada, Reno)
|Abstract: Although the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) provides some advantages over other implicit assessment tools, there are difficulties in demonstrating stable findings at an individual level. This may arise partially because consistent and inconsistent trial types are presented in blocks. Since much of the variance is accounted for by trial types, regardless of specific words tested, this buries the key information in a comparison not focused on individual items. Also, inevitable practice effects become more problematic because only inter-block data are useful for assessment purposes. The current paper will present a modified version of the IRAP in which consistent and inconsistent trials are mixed within each block by using the contextual cues of “Truth” and “Lie” and the procedure is simplified by presenting the relational cue rather than having participants select it. This allows individual items to be continuously assessed, without waiting for blocks of trials, thus reducing the impact of practice and trial block effects and separating them from the key source of assessment information. We will examine whether these modifications result in more robust measures of implicit relations at the level of the individual using a series of categories including positively and negatively valenced words.