Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
Implicit Reaction-Time Brand Measures/Evidence
Method evidence record

Implicit Reaction-Time Brand Measures

Implicit reaction-time brand measures use how fast people respond, rather than what they say, to gauge the associations a brand automatically triggers. The logic comes from Russell Fazio's demonstration that strong attitudes are activated automatically: when a brand acts as a prime, it speeds responses to evaluatively congruent targets and slows responses to incongruent ones, and the size of that facilitation indexes the brand's implicit evaluation. Building on this, response-latency tasks pair brands with positive or negative words, with attribute categories, or with competing brands, and read off implicit associations from millisecond differences in reaction time. Anthony Greenwald, Brian Nosek, and Mahzarin Banaji's improved scoring algorithm turns these latency differences into a standardized D-score that is comparable across people and tasks. Because the measures tap associations that operate before deliberate editing, they capture brand equity that consumers may be unwilling or unable to report. The result is a behaviorally grounded, hard-to-fake complement to survey-based brand tracking.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Implicit Reaction-Time Measures of Brand Associations (Response-Latency Methods)
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / marketing
  • Fazio, R. H., Sanbonmatsu, D. M., Powell, M. C., & Kardes, F. R. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 229-238. · DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.229
  • Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197-216. · DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Same method familyEye-Tracking in Advertising Researchmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyFacial Coding in Advertising Researchmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyNeuromarketing with EEGmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

2 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account