Do Response Options in the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) Matter? A Comparison of Contextual Relations versus Relational Coherent Indicators

Empirical analysis of features of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure may be important to results. As such, the current research compared effects of response options that were contextually cued relational responses (C_rels) versus relational coherence indicators (RCIs) across two IRAPs conducted with college student participants (N = 40). The IRAPs were similar except for the response options used, which were either “Same”/“Opposite” (C_rels) versus “Accurate”/“Inaccurate” (RCIs). D-scores for both IRAPs showed the expected IRAP effect (bias). A critical difference was noted dependent upon the type of response options used: the IRAP effect was shown to be stronger when C_rel response options were used. There was no statistically significant interaction effect shown between response option used and order of completion (i.e., C_rel IRAP first vs. RCI IRAP first), however, there was a statistically significant interaction effect shown between type of response options used on the IRAP, order of completion, and block-order presentation (consistent trial-blocks vs. inconsistent trial blocks presented first). Findings are discussed regarding potential implications and further research.