WORLDmag.com | Community | Blog Archive | A personality test that you can fail

Culture, WorldMagBlog Print

Click to Print

Include Comments

A personality test that you can fail

14 Comments

Written by Harrison Scott Key

May 28, 2:14 PM

Ever heard of the Implicit Association Test (IAT)? It’s a kind of test devised to tell ourselves things about ourselves that we might not know. Like giving ourselves an X-Ray. From Project Implicit: “It is well known that people don’t always ’speak their minds’, and it is suspected that people don’t always ‘know their minds’. Understanding such divergences is important to scientific psychology.” Which is why the IAT was developed.

You can take a whole variety of IATs at this site, like the Religion IAT, or the Gender/Career IAT. Or you can take the Presidential IAT, to see which candidate you really prefer. Even if you think you know whom you prefer.

Topic: Culture, WorldMagBlog

Keywords: Culture, Politics, Science

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Email a friend

RSS 2.0

back to top14 Comments to “A personality test that you can fail”

BY Cameron 05.28.08 AT 2:32 PM

Okay, I guess I’m stupid because it took me a few screens of taking the Presidential IAT to grasp the directions…which, of course, skewed the results.

It’s a site to play around on, later, though.
Report comment to moderator
BY Luke 05.28.08 AT 2:43 PM

I took the weapons/harmless objects test. I’m not too sure it means much since I noticed I got “better” at sorting as the test went on. The the eye finger association definitely improves from when you start the test to your last sets of sorting things.

Also some of the images seem poorly selected.

My results told me I have a moderate association of weapons to black US American’s compared to whites, but the weapons they showed were battle axes flails, and muskets! If it is trying to gage my associations wouldn’t it tell me more if they used pictures of Glocks and junk guns? I haven’t been bombarded by mainstream media with pictures of young black men with flails and maces!
Report comment to moderator
BY Pauline 05.28.08 AT 3:38 PM

I tried the one on Judaism/Other religions, and it told me I don’t have any significant preference for either Judaism or other religions. Which is what I said to begin with, so even if the test is valid it didn’t reveal anything new.

It would be interesting to read more about the assumptions and methodology behind the test, but I don’t have time for that right now. The test itself wasted enough time. But the idea of it is interesting.
Report comment to moderator
BY kimberly 05.28.08 AT 4:01 PM

I tried the Presidential Candidate one, and sure enough, I prefer John McCain. No surprises there.
Report comment to moderator
BY kimberly 05.28.08 AT 4:11 PM

Cameron … the directions were confusing. After about 2/3rds of the test, I figured out that it’s along the lines of writing the word “Blue” in red ink and asking somebody what color the word is. Invariably they will say blue instead of red.
Report comment to moderator
BY Wiglaf 05.28.08 AT 4:12 PM

I saw the page on weapons/harmless objects test. Interesting that it presupposes racism. I have no interest in taking a test that requires me to be racist.
Report comment to moderator
BY Luke 05.28.08 AT 4:45 PM

Wiglaf,

[1]It doesn’t presuppose racism. It wants to know if you have an easier time associating weapons with Blacks than with whites. The test doesn’t “break” if it turns out you have an easier time associating whites with weapons than blacks; there is no “requirement” in the mechanics of the test that mandates the end user “actually be a racist”!

[2]You’re reading into the test. If anyone took this test, found out he/she associates whites with weapons blacks, and then concluded that he/she was not a racist because of it, we would all have objections to that opinion. The point of the test is not to comment on racism, it’s to highlight implicit associations you didn’t know you had. Though if you (like me) guessed before taking the test that you would probably have an association between black people and weapons, than that wouldn’t make you an out-and-out racist. It could also mean that you are aware of your own whiteness and have some media literacy! Perceiving the social structure of racism is generally a good thing, but your comments betray your desire to stay willfully ignorant.
Report comment to moderator
BY unseenjoy 05.28.08 AT 5:06 PM

Luke,

The presupposed racism isn’t so much with the results of the test as it is with one of the pre-test questions, which asked us to rate on a scale of 1-10 how warmly affectionate we felt toward each group. That bugged me.

What I learned from the test is that I have a heck of a hard time figuring out instructions! Haha. Oh yes, supposedly I also have a Very Strong Association of white people with weapons. Whatever. I was just trying to hit the right key at the right time and not screw up miserably.
Report comment to moderator
BY StuBob 05.28.08 AT 8:47 PM

Evidently, I prefer Hillary for President. It may be true.

Also, I show a strong association between Female and Career, Male and Family. Perhaps it’s because I work with a bunch of women and have 3 sons. Or, maybe it’s poppycock.
Report comment to moderator
BY hrw 05.28.08 AT 11:50 PM

I strongly prefer Obama
I moderately prefer Jews over others
I moderately prefer straights.
Report comment to moderator
BY Wiglaf 05.29.08 AT 12:08 AM

“It wants to know if you have an easier time associating weapons with Blacks than with whites.”

Excuse me, Luke, but exactly how does that NOT presuppose racism??!! I saw that question and thought, well, yeah, I know this one black guy who I get along with really well and this one white guy who I don’t get along with at all, and I know this other black guy who I think is lame, and this other asian guy who I think is great…blah blah blah. NOW, they want me to generalize my affection toward an ENTIRE group based on skin color?? Explain again how that’s not racist?
Report comment to moderator
BY Wiglaf 05.29.08 AT 12:10 AM

So, based on my knowledge of INDIVIDUALS, it makes no sense for me to classify by skin color because my affection isn’t based on skin color. If it were, then I’d be racist. The questionnaire is asking me to base my affection on skin color AND THUS it’s racist! Seems simple enough to me.
Report comment to moderator
BY gdsuffern 05.29.08 AT 4:14 AM

I took the religion/Jew test. Interesting.

Seems like an effective way to enforce mind control and weaken personal conviction by forcing someone to choose between “bad”/”good” and Judaism/other religions. There is no neutrality here…even the folks wearing the white coats are biased. Neat.
Report comment to moderator
BY Theo Godwyn 05.29.08 AT 12:36 PM

Apparently I prefer Obama over Hillary over McCain.

Strange results. I am actually struggling between picking McCain or Obama.

Both candidates seem much less intelligent now than 6 months ago. Both seem far less capable of running the country.

I never considered voting for Hillary despite her similarity to issues with Obama. Although I admit I am reassessing my judgments of her based on her past failures seeing that McCain and Obama look to be weaker and weaker as this election cycle progresses.

All three candidates were tightly grouped in the results of my test though so perhaps there is no statistical significance to it.
Report comment to moderator