Cy has been relevant in discussions of this issue, with a number of recent papers attempting to find use for both self-report and indirect (often historically labeled “projective”) measures of DS5565 site dependency (Bornstein, 1998, 1999, 2002; Bornstein, Bowers, Robinson, 1995). Drawing heavily on the work of McClelland and colleagues (1989), Bornstein (1998) argued for differentiating “self-attributed” (self-report) from “implicit” (projectively measured) needs for dependency. Self-attributed dependency refers to those components of dependency that an individual has the ability and willingness to reveal. Conversely, implicit dependency needs are postulated to possibly operate outside of awareness, and consequently to influence Z-DEVD-FMKMedChemExpress Z-DEVD-FMK behavior unconsciously. In practice, self-attributed dependency needs are predictive of dependent behaviors when individuals are made aware of dependency’s relevance in a given situation. Implicit dependency needs, on the other hand, are hypothesized to be more predictive of spontaneous dependent behavior. For example, Bornstein (1998) found that scores on the self-report Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI; Hirschfeld, Klerman, Gough, Barrett, Korchin, Chodoff, 1977) better predicted help-seeking behavior in the laboratory when participants were informed that the purpose of the study was to uncover the relation between dependency and help-seeking. Further, scores on the Rorschach Oral Dependency scale (ROD; Masling, Rabie, Blondheim, 1967) were more predictive of “spontaneous” or uncued help-seeking; that is, when participants were not informed about the nature of the study. A similar distinction between self-report and implicit assessment has emerged in the social psychological literature, particularly in the domain of attitude research (for a theoretical discussion of this issue, see Wilson, Lindsey, Schooler, 2000). The recognition that individuals may be unwilling, or unable, to accurately report attitudes towards various objects has given rise to a number of techniques for measuring implicit social cognition. The most popular of these tools is the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, Schwartz, 1998), a computer-based measure of associative strength between an attitude object and an evaluative dimension. Although initially employed solely as an attitude measure, use of the IAT has extended into domains of self-esteem and self-concept. Greenwald and Farnham (2000) successfully adapted the IAT to derive meaningful indices of implicit self-esteem as well as implicit masculinity-femininity. Additionally, an IATderived index of shyness was shown to better predict spontaneous shy behavior than was an explicit measure of shyness, whereas explicit shyness was more predictive of controlled shy behavior (Asendorpf, Banse, Mucke, 2002). Similarly, the IAT has been adapted to assess anxiety, and was found to account for unique variance in experimenter-rated anxiety and performance deficits following a failure manipulation, beyond variance accounted for by self-reported anxiety (Egloff Schmukle, 2002). More recently, Schmukle and EgloffNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptJ Pers Assess. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 21.Cogswell et al.Page(2005) provided evidence for reliable IAT assessment of extraversion, and offer a nice discussion of how situational factors impact implicit measures.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Au.Cy has been relevant in discussions of this issue, with a number of recent papers attempting to find use for both self-report and indirect (often historically labeled “projective”) measures of dependency (Bornstein, 1998, 1999, 2002; Bornstein, Bowers, Robinson, 1995). Drawing heavily on the work of McClelland and colleagues (1989), Bornstein (1998) argued for differentiating “self-attributed” (self-report) from “implicit” (projectively measured) needs for dependency. Self-attributed dependency refers to those components of dependency that an individual has the ability and willingness to reveal. Conversely, implicit dependency needs are postulated to possibly operate outside of awareness, and consequently to influence behavior unconsciously. In practice, self-attributed dependency needs are predictive of dependent behaviors when individuals are made aware of dependency’s relevance in a given situation. Implicit dependency needs, on the other hand, are hypothesized to be more predictive of spontaneous dependent behavior. For example, Bornstein (1998) found that scores on the self-report Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI; Hirschfeld, Klerman, Gough, Barrett, Korchin, Chodoff, 1977) better predicted help-seeking behavior in the laboratory when participants were informed that the purpose of the study was to uncover the relation between dependency and help-seeking. Further, scores on the Rorschach Oral Dependency scale (ROD; Masling, Rabie, Blondheim, 1967) were more predictive of “spontaneous” or uncued help-seeking; that is, when participants were not informed about the nature of the study. A similar distinction between self-report and implicit assessment has emerged in the social psychological literature, particularly in the domain of attitude research (for a theoretical discussion of this issue, see Wilson, Lindsey, Schooler, 2000). The recognition that individuals may be unwilling, or unable, to accurately report attitudes towards various objects has given rise to a number of techniques for measuring implicit social cognition. The most popular of these tools is the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, Schwartz, 1998), a computer-based measure of associative strength between an attitude object and an evaluative dimension. Although initially employed solely as an attitude measure, use of the IAT has extended into domains of self-esteem and self-concept. Greenwald and Farnham (2000) successfully adapted the IAT to derive meaningful indices of implicit self-esteem as well as implicit masculinity-femininity. Additionally, an IATderived index of shyness was shown to better predict spontaneous shy behavior than was an explicit measure of shyness, whereas explicit shyness was more predictive of controlled shy behavior (Asendorpf, Banse, Mucke, 2002). Similarly, the IAT has been adapted to assess anxiety, and was found to account for unique variance in experimenter-rated anxiety and performance deficits following a failure manipulation, beyond variance accounted for by self-reported anxiety (Egloff Schmukle, 2002). More recently, Schmukle and EgloffNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptJ Pers Assess. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 21.Cogswell et al.Page(2005) provided evidence for reliable IAT assessment of extraversion, and offer a nice discussion of how situational factors impact implicit measures.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Au.
