Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction.

Abstract

\n Contains fulltext :\n 62198.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)\n

Keywords

Prejudice (legal term)PsychologySocial psychologySocial perceptionSocial relationInterpersonal interactionPerception

MeSH Terms

AdultBlack or African AmericanFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsMalePrejudiceReaction TimeSelf ConceptSocial PerceptionWhite People

Related Publications

Jörg Henseler , Christian M. Ringle , Rudolf R. Sinkovics

\n Contains fulltext :\n 82505.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)\n

2009 Research Portal (King's College London) 10324 citations

A Comparison of Approaches for the Analysis of Interaction Effects Between Latent Variables Using Partial Least Squares Path Modeling

Jörg Henseler , Wynne W. Chin

\n Contains fulltext :\n 87133.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)\n

2010 Structural Equation Modeling A Multid... 1064 citations

Publication Info

Year: 2002
Type: article
Volume: 82
Issue: 1
Pages: 62-68
Citations: 1109
Access: Closed

External Links

View on DOI.org PubMed

Social Impact

Altmetric

Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction.

PlumX Metrics

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

1109

OpenAlex

971

CrossRef

Cite This

APA Style

                            
                                    John F. Dovidio, 
                                
                                    Kerry Kawakami, 
                                
                                    Samuel L. Gaertner
                                
                            (2002). 
                            Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction.. 
                            Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
                            , 82
                            (1)
                            , 62-68.
                            https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62

Identifiers

DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62
PMID: 11811635

Data Quality

Data completeness: 81%