The Psychological Record

, Volume 69, Issue 1, pp 39–48 | Cite as

Social Context in a Collective IRAP Application about Gender Stereotypes: Mixed Versus Single Gender Groups

  • José ErrastiEmail author
  • Hugo Martinez
  • Carmen Rodriguez
  • Jennifer Marquez
  • Alejandro Maldonado
  • Alvaro Menendez
Original Article


The IRAP (Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure) is a procedure developed for the assessment of beliefs, attitudes, and other implicit cognitive elements. Stimuli-related variables that influence IRAP performance have been studied, but not the influence of social situation variables of the test itself. Gender stereotypes are one of the implicit beliefs most studied with the IRAP. Gender bias relational responses may be brought under the functional control of situational social variables, such as responding in a mixed gender group or responding in a single gender group (women only/men only). One hundred and ten undergraduates (65 women and 45 men; aged 18–22) performed a collective IRAP application about gender stereotypes. In the first experimental condition, the test was applied in mixed gender groups. In the second experimental condition, the test was applied in single gender groups. The results showed that gender stereotypes were present in men’s and women’s responses to the IRAP. Both male and female participants showed greater gender bias when responding in single gender groups than in mixed gender groups in all the IRAP trial types. The social context in which IRAP was applied influenced the participant's performance. The advantages of collective IRAP applications are also discussed.


Implicit relational assessment procedure Implicit measure Relational frame theory Gender stereotypes 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. In this informed consent, participants were told that they were invited to collaborate in a test about reaction times, but they were not told that the aim of the investigation was to study the different reaction times in single gender versus mixed gender groups. It was assumed that this mild deception does not involve ethical consequences. This research was ethically approved by the Department of Psychology at the University of Oviedo.

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Power, P., Hayden, E., Milne, R., & Stewart, I. (2006). Do you really know what you believe? Developing the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a direct measure of implicit beliefs. Irish Psychologist, 7(32), 169–177.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Stewart, I., & Boles, S. (2010). A sketch of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model. The Psychological Record, 60(3), 527–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnes-Holmes, D., Hayden, E., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2008). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a response-time and event-related- potentials methodology for testing natural verbal relations: A preliminary study. The Psychological Record, 58(4), 497–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes-Holmes, D., Murphy, A., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2010). The implicit relational assessment procedure: Exploring the impact of private versus public contexts and the response latency criterion on pro-white and anti-black stereotyping among white Irish individuals. The Psychological Record, 60, 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes-Holmes, D., Waldron, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2009). Testing the validity of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the implicit association test (IAT): Measuring attitudes towards Dublin and country life in Ireland. The Psychological Record, 59, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bast, D. F., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2015). Developing an individualized implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a potential measure of self-forgiveness related to negative and positive behavior. The Psychological Record, 65(4), 717–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum, R. W., Mmari, K., & Moreau, C. (2017). It begins at 10: How gender expectations shape early adolescence around the world. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 61(4), S3–S4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Castillo-Mayén, R., & Montes-Berges, B. (2014). Análisis de los estereotipos de género actuales. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1044–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daniels, E. A., Layh, M. C., & Porzelius, L. K. (2016). Grooming ten-year-olds with gender stereotypes? A content analysis of preteen and teen girl magazines. Body Image, 19, 57–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dawson, D. L., Barnes-Holmes, D., Gresswell, D. M., Hart, A. J. P., & Gore, N. J. (2009). Assessing the implicit beliefs of sexual offenders using the implicit relational assessment procedure: A first study. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research & Treatment, 21(1), 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Döring, N., Reif, A., & Poeschl, S. (2016). How gender-stereotypical are selfies? A content analysis and comparison with magazine adverts. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(B), 955–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fernandez, J., Quiroga, M. A., Escorial, S., & Privado, J. (2014). Explicit and implicit assessment of gender roles. Psicothema, 26(2), 244–251.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Finn, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., Hussey, I., & Graddy, J. (2016). Exploring the behavioral dynamics of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure: The impact of three types of introductory rules. Psychological Record, 66, 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. García-Vega, E., Menéndez Robledo, E., García Fernández, P., & Rico Fernández, R. (2010). Influencia del sexo y del género en el comportamiento sexual de una población adolescente. Psicothema, 22(4), 606–612.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.). (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2013). A functional approach to the study of implicit cognition: The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model. In S. Dymond & B. Roche (Eds.), Advances in relational frame theory and contextual behavioural science (pp. 97–125). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
  19. Instituto de la Juventud (INJUVE) (2010). Jóvenes y sexo, el estereotipo que obliga y el rito que identifica [Youth and gender, the stereotype that obligate and the rite that identify]. Retrieved from
  20. Kavanagh, D., Hussey, I., McEnteggart, C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2016). Using the IRAP to explore natural language statements. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 5(4), 247–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McKenna, I., Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., De Schryver, M., Yoder, R., & O'Shea, D. (2016). Obesity, food restriction, and implicit attitudes to healthy and unhealthy foods: Lessons learned from the implicit relational assessment procedure. Appetite, 100, 41–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nicholson, E., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2012). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a measure of spider fear. The Psychological Record, 62, 263–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nicholson, E., Hopkins-Doyle, A., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, R. A. P. (2014). Psychopathology, anxiety or attentional control: Determining the variables which predict IRAP performance. The Psychological Record, 64, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nicholson, E., McCourt, A., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2013). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a measure of obsessive beliefs in relation to disgust. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 2, 23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Parling, T., Cernvall, M., Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Ghaderi, A. (2012). Using the implicit relational assessment procedure to compare implicit pro-thin/anti-fat attitudes of patients with anorexia nervosa and non-clinical controls. Eating Disorders, 20(2), 127–143.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Power, P., Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2009). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a measure of implicit relative preferences: A first study. The Psychological Record, 59(4), 621–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Roddy, S., Stewart, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2011). Facial reactions reveal that slim is good but fat is not bad: Implicit and explicit measures of body-size bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(6), 688–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rudman, L. A., & Goodwin, S. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 87(4), 494–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Scanlon, G., McEnteggart, C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2014). Using the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) to assess implicit gender bias and self-esteem in typically-developing children and children with ADHD and with dyslexia. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 19(2), 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Skowronski, J. J., & Lawrence, M. A. (2001). A comparative study of the implicit and explicit gender attitudes of children and college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25(2), 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vahey, N. A., Nicholson, E., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2015). A meta-analysis of criterion effects for the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) in the clinical domain. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry, 48, 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Errasti
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hugo Martinez
    • 1
  • Carmen Rodriguez
    • 1
  • Jennifer Marquez
    • 1
  • Alejandro Maldonado
    • 1
  • Alvaro Menendez
    • 1
  1. 1.Facultad de PsicologíaUniversity of OviedoOviedoSpain

Personalised recommendations