Compare methods

	Implicit Political Attitude Measure	Affective Polarization Measurement
Field	Political Psychology	Political Psychology
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	1998	2012
Originator	Anthony Greenwald; B. Keith Payne	Shanto Iyengar, Gaurav Sood & Yphtach Lelkes
Type	Reaction-time implicit measure	Composite survey index
Seminal source	Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464-1480.	Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431.
Aliases	Political IAT, Implicit Association Test (Political), Affect Misattribution Procedure, AMP	Affective Polarization Index, Partisan Affect Gap, Thermometer Difference Measure
Related	4	4
Summary	Implicit political attitude measures assess automatic, relatively uncontrolled evaluations of political objects, candidates, parties, racial and social groups, using reaction-time and misattribution tasks rather than self-report. The two leading instruments are the Implicit Association Test (Greenwald et al., 1998), which infers attitudes from the speed of categorization, and the Affect Misattribution Procedure (Payne et al., 2005), which infers them from how a prime biases judgments of ambiguous targets.	Affective polarization measurement quantifies the gap between how positively people feel toward their own political party (the in-party) and how negatively they feel toward the opposing party (the out-party). Iyengar, Sood and Lelkes (2012) showed that this affective divide has grown sharply even where issue positions have not, reframing polarization as a social-identity phenomenon of partisan like and dislike rather than ideological distance.