This article provides a comprehensive review of divergent conceptualizations of the "implicit" construct that have emerged in attitude research over the past two decades. In doing so, our goal is to raise awareness of the harmful consequences of conceptual ambiguities associated with this terminology. We identify three main conceptualizations of the "implicitness" construct: The procedural conceptualization (implicit as indirect), the functional conceptualization (implicit as automatic), and the mental theory conceptualization (implicit as associative), as well as two hybrid conceptualizations (implicit as indirect and automatic, implicit as driven by affective gut reactions). We discuss critical limitations associated with each conceptualization and explain that confusion also arises from their coexistence. We recommend discontinuing the usage of the "implicit" terminology in attitude research and research inspired by it. We offer terminological alternatives aimed at increasing both the precision of theorization and the practical value of future research.
Corneille, O., & Hütter, M. (2020). Implicit? What Do You Mean? A Comprehensive Review of the Delusive Implicitness Construct in Attitude Research. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Accepted/in-press. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320911325 (Original work published 2020)