Earlier quoted context omitted.
The IAT is pseudoscience. The Implicit Association Test at Age 21: No Evidence for Construct Validity [0] > The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is 21 years old. Greenwald et al. (1998) proposed that the IAT measures individual differences in implicit social cognition. This claim requires evidence of construct validity. I review the evidence and show that there is insufficient evidence for this claim. Most important,…
What kind of person haunts 4-day-old articles to post long, off-topic comments like this? And that cites Jesse Singal of all people as some sort of authority? What I said is that it was helpful to me personally. Which it was, in that it helped me recognize my own implicit anti-black bias. Unless you'd like to prove that the whole concept of unexamined biases is 100% unreal, please move along and let people have a dis…
> What kind of person haunts 4-day-old articles
What a strange attempt at an insult. Do you not read articles that are more than 3 days old?
Your own comment was 2 days old on a 5-day-old article, which makes this attempt at an insult even more comical.
> off-topic
> irrelevant interruption
Do you need to read your own comment again to refresh your memory? Do you know what Project Implicit is?
It’s exactly what I’m addressing, so what mental gymnastics are you doing to claim my comment is “off-topic” and “irrelevant”?
> And that cites Jesse Singal of all people as some sort of authority?
One of the authors of the article, who’s referencing the relevant studies? What’s the issue? Rather than making more cryptic ad hominem attacks, why not say something substantive?
> was helpful to me personally
It’s ironic that you’re willing to support horoscope-level pseudoscience (and personally attack anyone who points out it’s pseudoscience) because it supports your preconceived biases.