Skip to Main Content
Article navigation
Purpose

There has been contradictory evidence as to whether implicit attitudes are more indicative of food consumption behavior than explicit attitudes. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the predictive validity of implicit attitudes for food consumption behaviors with two popular indirect measures – the implicit association test (IAT) and the affective misattribution procedure (AMP).

Design/methodology/approach

The authors examined the predictive validity of the IAT and AMP for focal and incidental food consumption behaviors (n=277).

Findings

Results revealed that the IAT and the AMP were more context-dependent than initially expected. The IAT only predicted incidental consumption behaviors in Study 1, and the AMP only predicted incidental consumption behaviors when preceding the IAT. However, the indirect measures provided unique variance for predicting incidental consumption behaviors. Only a direct, self-report measure predicted focal behaviors.

Research limitations/implications

These findings suggest that both the AMP and the IAT can predict incidental consumption behaviors, but the presence and strength of these effects may be moderated by unsuspected variables such as task order.

Practical implications

The current study provides evidence for the benefits of utilizing implicit measures in addition to self-report measures during consumer and market research.

Originality/value

This research reevaluates the predictive validity of the IAT and AMP for food consumption behaviors and employs two measures of food consumption behaviors.

Licensed re-use rights only
You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Please enter valid email address.
Email address must be 94 characters or fewer.
Pay-Per-View Access
$41.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal