Search

Objective We conducted five studies testing whether an implicit measure of favorability toward power over universalism values predicts spontaneous prejudice and discrimination. Method Studies 1 (N = 192) and 2 (N = 86) examined correlations between spontaneous favorability toward power (vs. universalism) values, achievement (vs. benevolence) values, and a spontaneous measure of prejudice toward ethnic minorities. Study 3 (N = 159) tested whether conditioning participants to associate power values with positive adjectives and universalism values with negative adjectives (or inversely) affects spontaneous prejudice. Study 4 (N = 95) tested whether decision bias toward female handball players could be predicted by spontaneous attitude toward power (vs. universalism) values. Study 5 (N = 123) examined correlations between spontaneous attitude toward power (vs. universalism) values, spontaneous importance toward power (vs. universalism) values, and spontaneous prejudice toward Black African people. Results Spontaneous positivity toward power (vs. universalism) values was associated with spontaneous negativity toward minorities and predicted gender bias in a decision task, whereas the explicit measures did not. Conclusions These results indicate that the implicit assessment of evaluative responses attached to human values helps to model value-attitude-behavior relations.

Risk perceptions concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are often considered to reflect media coverage. However, it might be said that people seek out information consistent with their attitudes and avoid information which could challenge them. This process refers to the selective exposure principle derived from cognitive dissonance theory. Although this principle is now well established, the only two studies carried out to date in the field of GMOs have produced contradictory results. Additionally, no study has considered the link between risk perceptions, threat perceptions and attitudes as possible antecedents of selective exposure in the field of GMOs. The aim of the present research was to fill this gap. Results of a multiple-mediation model showed that people did in fact expose themselves selectively in the field of GMOs: The higher the level of general risk perception they reported, the higher the perceived threat, the more negative their attitude towards GMOs and the greater their inclination to expose themselves to information on the harmful effects of GM food. We discuss the consequences of selective exposure and the potential levers which could favor exposure to pros and cons, thereby also favoring informed food choices.

International audience; The influence of competition level on referees' decision-making was investigated. Referees' decisions in 90 handball games (30 games X 3 competition levels) were observed in different situations related to the advantage rule, and 100 referees from two different levels of expertise were subsequently asked to offer explanations for the competition-level effects from the first part of the study. Results revealed that at the highest level of competition referees intervened less frequently with sporting sanctions, but more frequently with disciplinary sanctions. These effects were apparent mainly in immediate intervention situations and unsuccessful advantage situations, but not in successful situations. Referees explained these effects of competition level in terms of a player competence stereotype, in addition to referees' different expertise across competition level. The implications of the findings for understanding how status-related stereotypes impact on intervention behavior are discussed.

The purpose of this series of studies is to test a paper-and-pencil procedure adapted from a computerized Implicit Association Test: the SC-IAT-P (Personalized Single Category Implicit Association Test, Bardin, et al. 2014). This adaptation combines the advantages of SC-IAT (Karpinski & Steinman, 2006), IAT-P (Olson & Fazio, 2004) and paper-and-pencil IAT (Lemm, Lane, Sattler, Khan & Nosek, 2008). It is capable of measuring implicit attitude toward a single object, limits the influence of extrapersonal associations, and is unquestionably easy to administer. The tool was used in three studies with two different goals. Study 1 highlights a link between paper-and-pencil SC-IAT-P and a computerized corollary in the field of tobacco-smoking. Study 2 reveals the ability of the tool to distinguish smokers from non-smokers according to their score and smokers who have already considered quitting from those who have never considered it. Finally, Study 3, carried out between the two rounds of the French presidential elections in 2012, highlights the difference of attitude between supporters on the Left and Right but also an effect of indecision. The discussion deals with the prospects offered by this tool and its limitations. Résumé: Cette série d’études teste une adaptation en procédure papier crayon d’un test d’association implicite informatisé : le SC-IAT-P (Single Category Implicit Association Test Personalized, Bardin, Perrissol, Py, Launay, & Escoubès, 2014). Cette adaptation allie les avantages du SC-IAT (Karpinski & Steinman, 2006) de l’IAT-P (Olson & Fazio, 2004) et de l’IAT format papier crayon (Lemm, Lane, Sattler, Khan, & Nosek, 2008). Il mesure l’attitude implicite envers un unique objet, limite la contamination de la mesure par des associations extra-personnelles et son administration est d’une facilité indéniable. L’outil a été mis en oeuvre dans trois études portant sur deux objets. L’étude 1 permet de mettre en évidence un lien entre le SC-IAT-P papier crayon et son corollaire informatisé dans le domaine du tabac. L’étude 2 révèle la capacité de l’outil à discriminer les fumeurs des non-fumeurs en fonction de leur score au SC-IAT-P papier crayon mais également les fumeurs qui ont déjà envisagé d’arrêter de fumer de ceux qui n’ont jamais envisagé. Enfin, l’étude 3, réalisée pendant l’entre deux tours des élections présidentielles françaises de 2012, met en évidence une différence d’attitude entre les sympathisants de gauche et de droite mais également un effet de l’indécision. La discussion porte notamment sur les perspectives offertes par cet outil et ses limites.