↓ Skip to main content

I Drink Therefore I am: Validating Alcohol-Related Implicit Association Tests

Overview of attention for article published in Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
I Drink Therefore I am: Validating Alcohol-Related Implicit Association Tests
Published in
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, March 2013
DOI 10.1037/a0027640
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristen P. Lindgren, Clayton Neighbors, Bethany A. Teachman, Reinout W. Wiers, Erin Westgate, Anthony G. Greenwald

Abstract

There is an imperative to predict hazardous drinking among college students. Implicit measures have been useful in predicting unique variance in drinking and alcohol-related problems. However, they have been developed to test different theories of drinking and have rarely been directly compared with one another. Thus, their comparative utility is unclear. The current study examined five alcohol-related variants of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) in a sample of 300 undergraduates and sought to establish their predictive validity. Results indicated that the Drinking Identity IAT, which measured associations of "drinker" with "me," was the most consistent predictor of alcohol consumption, alcohol problems, and alcohol cravings. It also had the highest internal consistency and test-retest reliability scores. The results for the Alcohol Excitement and Alcohol Approach IATs were also promising, but their psychometric properties were less consistent. Although the two IATs were positively correlated with all of the drinking outcome variables, they did not consistently predict unique variance in those variables after controlling for explicit measures. They also had relatively lower internal consistencies and test-retest reliabilities. Ultimately, results suggested that implicit drinking identity may be a useful tool for predicting alcohol consumption, problems, and cravings and a potential target for prevention and intervention efforts.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 178 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 22%
Student > Master 26 14%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 22 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 33 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 105 56%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 6%
Social Sciences 8 4%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 43 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2013.
All research outputs
#6,570,492
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
#343
of 1,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,788
of 206,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 206,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.