allen r. mcconnell research


	Overview \| Lab \| Support & Awards \| Details \| Photos Currently, we are conducting three major lines of research in my lab: self-concept representation, implicit and explicit attitudes, and stereotype threat. Implicit and explicit attitudes Work in our lab also explores how people form evaluations of attitude objects (e.g., people, groups, consumer products). Our most-recent work has sought to understand differences in the processes underlying explicit attitudes (i.e., attitudes that people can report and for which activation can be consciously controlled) and implicit attitudes (i.e., attitudes for which people do not initially have conscious access and for which activation cannot be controlled). Much of this work has been based on a systems of evaluation approach, which posits fundamentally different systems underlie implicit and explicit attitudes. For example, we have shown simultaneous dissociation of implicit and explicit attitudes, with the former responsive to subliminal priming and the latter responsive to visual descriptions of behavior (Rydell, McConnell, Mackie, & Strain, 2006). Also, we have demonstrated that implicit attitudes (relative to explicit attitudes) change more slowly, are less influenced by explicit processing goals, and predict spontaneous behaviors (Rydell & McConnell, 2006). More recently, we have extended our work to consider how people form implicit impressions of others (McConnell, Rydell, Strain, & Mackie, 2008). For example, we show that group association cues (e.g., a target person's attractiveness, race, or obesity) often impact implicit attitudes (and overwhelm any individuated, behavioral information about the person) but not explicit attitudes. Thus, an obese man can perform dozens of positive behaviors, resulting in positive explicit attitudes toward him but negative implicit attitudes toward him. Much of this research was based on earlier work that showed dissociations in gay men's sexual orientation attitudes. Specifically, we (Jellison, McConnell, & Gabriel, 2004) found that gay men's implicit attitudes tended to predict behaviors reflecting long-term experiences (e.g., involvement in the gay community) whereas gay men's explicit attitudes predicted deliberate, strategic behaviors such as how they disclose their sexual orientation. This work, in turn, followed our research that was the first to show that the implicit association test (IAT), but not explicit measures of prejudice, could predict spontaneous interracial behaviors (McConnell & Leibold, 2001). In other work on attitudes, we have explored how perceptions of "entitativity" (i.e., how strongly a social target possesses unity and coherence) influences our attitudes and impressions. For instance, we have found that when people expect greater entitativity in groups, their arguments are more persuasive and produce greater attitude change (Rydell & McConnell, 2005). Relatedly, we have also examined how people's metacognitive theories (in this case, about whether being persuaded is good or bad) affects their attitude certainty following a persuasive attempt (Rydell, Hugenberg, & McConnell, 2006). In addition to studying social influence, we have explored more basic mechanisms of how expectations about social targets affects social information processing, especially with respect to on-line versus memory-based judgments (McConnell et al., 1994). When people form stronger on-line impressions, they are more influenced by early information (i.e., primary effects), show greater recall of the target's behaviors, and form more-resilient impressions. For instance, when people expect greater entitativity, they form stronger on-line impressions of targets (McConnell et al., 1997). Moreover, people expect less entitativity for group targets than they do for individual targets or even for themselves (McConnell et al., 2002). In addition, people vary in the extent to which they naturally anticipate consistency in social targets. In one set of studies (McConnell, 2001), we showed that people who believe that personality traits are relatively fixed and rigid (i.e., entity theorists) formed on-line impressions of people whereas those who believe that personality traits are relatively flexible and malleable (i.e., incremental theorists) formed memory-based impressions of people. This program of research has shown that target types, interaction goals, target expectancies, and even individual differences play a lawful role in impression formation and social influence. Relevant publications McConnell, A. R., Rydell, R. J., Strain, L. M., & Mackie, D. M. (2008). Forming implicit and explicit attitudes toward individuals: Social group association cues. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 792-807. Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit attitude change: A systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 995-1008. Rydell, R. J., McConnell, A. R., Mackie, D. M., & Strain, L. M. (2006). Of two minds: Forming and changing valence inconsistent implicit and explicit attitudes. Psychological Science, 17, 954-958. Rydell, R. J., Hugenberg, K., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Resistance can be good or bad: How theories of resistance and dissonance affect attitude certainty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 740-750. Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2005). Perceptions of entitativity and attitude change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 99-110. Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 629-642. McConnell, A. R., Rydell, R. J., & Leibold, J. M. (2002). Expectations of consistency about the self: Consequences for self-concept formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 569-585. McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 435-442. McConnell, A. R. (2001). Implicit theories: Consequences for social judgments of individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 215-227. McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (1997). Target entitativity: Implications for information processing about individual and group targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 750-762. McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (1994). On-line and memory-based aspects of individual and group target judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 173-185.

Overview | Lab | Support & Awards | Details | Photos

Currently, we are conducting three major lines of research in my lab: self-concept representation, implicit and explicit attitudes, and stereotype threat.

Implicit and explicit attitudes

Work in our lab also explores how people form evaluations of attitude objects (e.g., people, groups, consumer products). Our most-recent work has sought to understand differences in the processes underlying explicit attitudes (i.e., attitudes that people can report and for which activation can be consciously controlled) and implicit attitudes (i.e., attitudes for which people do not initially have conscious access and for which activation cannot be controlled). Much of this work has been based on a systems of evaluation approach, which posits fundamentally different systems underlie implicit and explicit attitudes. For example, we have shown simultaneous dissociation of implicit and explicit attitudes, with the former responsive to subliminal priming and the latter responsive to visual descriptions of behavior (Rydell, McConnell, Mackie, & Strain, 2006). Also, we have demonstrated that implicit attitudes (relative to explicit attitudes) change more slowly, are less influenced by explicit processing goals, and predict spontaneous behaviors (Rydell & McConnell, 2006). More recently, we have extended our work to consider how people form implicit impressions of others (McConnell, Rydell, Strain, & Mackie, 2008). For example, we show that group association cues (e.g., a target person's attractiveness, race, or obesity) often impact implicit attitudes (and overwhelm any individuated, behavioral information about the person) but not explicit attitudes. Thus, an obese man can perform dozens of positive behaviors, resulting in positive explicit attitudes toward him but negative implicit attitudes toward him.

Much of this research was based on earlier work that showed dissociations in gay men's sexual orientation attitudes. Specifically, we (Jellison, McConnell, & Gabriel, 2004) found that gay men's implicit attitudes tended to predict behaviors reflecting long-term experiences (e.g., involvement in the gay community) whereas gay men's explicit attitudes predicted deliberate, strategic behaviors such as how they disclose their sexual orientation. This work, in turn, followed our research that was the first to show that the implicit association test (IAT), but not explicit measures of prejudice, could predict spontaneous interracial behaviors (McConnell & Leibold, 2001).

In other work on attitudes, we have explored how perceptions of "entitativity" (i.e., how strongly a social target possesses unity and coherence) influences our attitudes and impressions. For instance, we have found that when people expect greater entitativity in groups, their arguments are more persuasive and produce greater attitude change (Rydell & McConnell, 2005). Relatedly, we have also examined how people's metacognitive theories (in this case, about whether being persuaded is good or bad) affects their attitude certainty following a persuasive attempt (Rydell, Hugenberg, & McConnell, 2006). In addition to studying social influence, we have explored more basic mechanisms of how expectations about social targets affects social information processing, especially with respect to on-line versus memory-based judgments (McConnell et al., 1994). When people form stronger on-line impressions, they are more influenced by early information (i.e., primary effects), show greater recall of the target's behaviors, and form more-resilient impressions. For instance, when people expect greater entitativity, they form stronger on-line impressions of targets (McConnell et al., 1997). Moreover, people expect less entitativity for group targets than they do for individual targets or even for themselves (McConnell et al., 2002). In addition, people vary in the extent to which they naturally anticipate consistency in social targets. In one set of studies (McConnell, 2001), we showed that people who believe that personality traits are relatively fixed and rigid (i.e., entity theorists) formed on-line impressions of people whereas those who believe that personality traits are relatively flexible and malleable (i.e., incremental theorists) formed memory-based impressions of people. This program of research has shown that target types, interaction goals, target expectancies, and even individual differences play a lawful role in impression formation and social influence.

Relevant publications

McConnell, A. R., Rydell, R. J., Strain, L. M., & Mackie, D. M. (2008). Forming implicit and explicit attitudes toward individuals: Social group association cues. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 792-807.

Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit attitude change: A systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 995-1008.

Rydell, R. J., McConnell, A. R., Mackie, D. M., & Strain, L. M. (2006). Of two minds: Forming and changing valence inconsistent implicit and explicit attitudes. Psychological Science, 17, 954-958.

Rydell, R. J., Hugenberg, K., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Resistance can be good or bad: How theories of resistance and dissonance affect attitude certainty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 740-750.

Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2005). Perceptions of entitativity and attitude change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 99-110.

Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 629-642.

McConnell, A. R., Rydell, R. J., & Leibold, J. M. (2002). Expectations of consistency about the self: Consequences for self-concept formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 569-585.

McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 435-442.

McConnell, A. R. (2001). Implicit theories: Consequences for social judgments of individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 215-227.

McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (1997). Target entitativity: Implications for information processing about individual and group targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 750-762.

McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (1994). On-line and memory-based aspects of individual and group target judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 173-185.