Bibliography

Selected Further Reading

Semantic Bathymetry™ draws upon established research in implicit cognition, psychometrics, semantic differential theory, response-time modelling and affective psychology. The publications below represent a selection of the academic literature that informs the design philosophy of the platform. They should not be interpreted as endorsements of, or direct descriptions of, the proprietary methods developed by Cognitif Group Limited.

The Semba Library contains a more extensive interactive RAG corpus of research material. Access may be granted following a qualified application to cognitif@semba.ai.

Implicit cognition and the IAT

  1. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 17–41. doi.org/10.1037/a0015575
  2. Buttrick, N. R., Axt, J. R., Ebersole, C. R., & Huband, J. (2020). Re-assessing the incremental predictive validity of Implicit Association Tests. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 88, 103941. doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103941
  3. Elder, J., Wilson, L., & Calanchini, J. (2024). Estimating the reliability and stability of cognitive processes contributing to responses on the Implicit Association Test. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 50(10), 1451–1470. doi.org/10.1177/01461672231171256
  4. Kvam, P. D., Irving, L. H., Sokratous, K., & Smith, C. T. (2024). Improving the reliability and validity of the IAT with a dynamic model driven by similarity. Behavior Research Methods, 56(3), 2158–2193. doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02141-1
  5. Cummins, J., Hussey, I., & Spruyt, A. (2022). The role of attitude features in the reliability of IAT scores. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 101, 104330. doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104330
  6. Richetin, J., Costantini, G., Perugini, M., & Schönbrodt, F. (2015). Should we stop looking for a better scoring algorithm for handling Implicit Association Test data? Test of the role of errors, extreme latencies treatment, scoring formula, and practice trials on reliability and validity. PLOS ONE, 10(6), e0129601. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129601
  7. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-103357-0.
  8. Kahneman, D., Sibony, O., & Sunstein, C. R. (2021). Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment. William Collins. ISBN 978-0-00-830899-5.
  9. Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-101459-3.

Response latency and drift diffusion

  1. Fatfouta, R., Schröder-Abé, M., & Merkl, A. (2014). Forgiving, fast and slow: validity of the implicit association test for predicting differential response latencies in a transgression-recall paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 728. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00728
  2. Schneider, S., Hernandez, R., Junghaenel, D. U., Orriens, B., Lee, P.-J., & Stone, A. A. (2023). Response times in Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA): shedding light on the response process with a drift diffusion model. Current Psychology. doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04773-0
  3. Chávez De la Peña, A. F., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2025). An EZ Bayesian hierarchical drift diffusion model for response time and accuracy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 32(6), 3067–3087. doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02729-y
  4. Woods, D. L., Wyma, J. M., Yund, E. W., Herron, T. J., & Reed, B. (2015). Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 193. doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00193
  5. Revie, L., & Metzler-Baddeley, C. (2024). Age-related fornix decline predicts conservative response strategy-based slowing in perceptual decision-making. Aging Brain, 5, 100106. doi.org/10.1016/j.nbas.2024.100106
  6. Theisen, M., Lerche, V., von Krause, M., et al. (2021). Age differences in diffusion model parameters: a meta-analysis. Psychological Research, 85(5), 2012–2021. doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01371-8

Semantic representation and affect

  1. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. University of Illinois Press.
  2. Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161–1178.
  3. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton.