|
| International Symposium - The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) II: A Behavior-Analytic Methodology for Assessing Implicit Beliefs and Attitudes |
| Monday, May 29, 2006 |
| 3:00 PM–4:20 PM |
| International Ballroom South |
| Area: EAB; Domain: Basic Research |
| Chair: Ian T. Stewart (National University of Ireland, Galway) |
| Abstract: Relational Frame Theory (RFT) is a modern behavioural approach to human language and cognition, the central postulate of which is that higher-cognitive functioning is composed of relational acts. A recent development in this research area is an RFT-based procedure for measuring implicit relations, termed the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). Initial studies have shown that the IRAP may be used to measure relational networks or attitudes that individuals are either unaware of or may wish to conceal. The IRAP appears to offer advantages over other methods that use reaction time measures to assess attitudes (e.g. the Implicit Association Test), both in its theoretical rationale and its ability to measure many types of relationships. This symposium is the second of a pair whose theme is IRAP-based research. The first and fourth papers present work concerned with the reliability of the IRAP, the second presented IRAP-based research on attitudes to self and others in prisoner and non-prisoner populations and the third examined the malleabilty of the IRAP. |
| |
| The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) V: How Reliable is the IRAP? |
| MICHELLE KELLY (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Amanda D. Kelly (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Yvonne Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Dermot Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Ian T. Stewart (National University of Ireland, Galway), Claire Campbell (National University of Ireland, Maynooth) |
| Abstract: This paper presents a series of studies that sought to determine if the IRAP effect is maintained across repeated exposures and whether or not the IRAP produces a release-from-suppression rebound effect. The IRAP presented the sample stimuli “Pleasant” and “Unpleasant” with examples of pleasant and unpleasant things as target stimuli, and the response options “Similar” and “Opposite.” In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to the same IRAP across multiple exposures, with two exposures per day across five separate days. On day six, novel stimuli were employed with the IRAP to determine if any reduction in the original IRAP effect would generalize to novel stimuli. In Experiment 2, participants were exposed to the IRAP but were asked to “fake” the test try thinking of pleasant things as unpleasant and unpleasant things as pleasant. Subsequently, they were exposed to another IRAP, but this time participants were instructed to respond as normal (treating pleasant as pleasant and unpleasant as unpleasant). Results from both experiments shed light on the reliability of the IRAP and its possible use in thought suppression research. |
| |
| The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) VI: Self, Others, and Crime? |
| NIGEL AUGUSTINE VAHEY (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Suzanne Comerford (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Yvonne Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Dermot Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Ian T. Stewart (National University of Ireland, Galway), Claire Campbell (National University of Ireland, Maynooth) |
| Abstract: This paper presents two experiments that sought to determine if the IRAP can be used to assess attitudes to self and others in prisoner and non-prisoner populations. In Experiment 1, Irish prisoners and non-prisoners were presented with the sample stimuli “Similar” and “Opposite” with examples of good and bad characteristics as target stimuli, and the response options Participant’s own name and Not participant’s own name. In Experiment 2, non-prisoner participants were exposed to an IRAP that presented the words “Safe” and “Dangerous” as samples, pictures of black and white men holding either guns or power-tools, and the response options “Similar” and “Opposite.” Results from the study have implications for the IRAP as a possible measure of implicit attitudes towards self and others in the context of crime and imprisonment. |
| |
| The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) VII: How Malleable is an IRAP Performance? |
| CLAIRE CULLEN (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Dermot Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Yvonne Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Ian T. Stewart (National University of Ireland, Galway) |
| Abstract: This paper presents a study that sought to determine if the IRAP effect can be modulated through exposure to relevant positive and negative exemplars. Adult participants were exposed to an IRAP, in which the sample stimuli were “Young People” and “Old People,” with positive and negative target words as target stimuli, and the response options “Similar” and “Opposite.” After this first IRAP, half of the participants were exposed to examples of positively valenced old people and negatively valenced young people; the remaining participants were exposed to examples of positively valenced young people and negatively valenced old people. All participants were then re-exposed to the IRAP. The results from the study shed light on the extent to which implicit attitudes, as measured by the IRAP, are best considered dynamic and flexible, rather than rigid and unchangeable behaviors. |
| |
| The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) VIII: How Reliable is the IRAP with Socially Sensitive Stimuli? |
| NIAMH O'DOWD (National University of Ireland, Galway), Ian T. Stewart (National University of Ireland, Galway), Dermot Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Yvonne Barnes-Holmes (National University of Ireland, Maynooth) |
| Abstract: This paper presents a series of studies that sought to determine if the IRAP effect is maintained across repeated exposures in the context of socially sensitive stimuli and whether or not the IRAP produces a release-from-suppression rebound effect with regard to these stimuli. The IRAP presented the sample stimuli “More Likeable” and “Less Likeable” with pairs of names of nationalities as target stimuli, and the response options “True” and “False.” In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to the same IRAP across multiple exposures, with two exposures per day across five separate days. On day six, novel stimuli were employed with the IRAP to determine if any reduction in the original effect would generalize to novel stimuli. Results from this experiment shed light on the reliability of the IRAP in the context of socially sensitive stimuli. |
|
| |