Cilj istraživanja bio je usporediti valjanost dviju verzija Testa implicitnih asocijacija (IAT) za mjerenje implicitnog motiva za moći. U prvoj verziji IAT-a kao kategorije atributa koristili smo prirodne antonime “moć” i “nemoć”, dok smo u drugoj verziji IAT-a koristili evaluativno ujednačenije kategorije “dominacija” i “suradnja”.
U istraživanju je sudjelovao uzorak studenata psihologije (N=73). Uz podatke na dvije verzije IAT-a, prikupili smo samoprocjene na eksplicitnoj mjeri motiva za moći, dvije mjere intrinzične i ekstrinzične motivacije te procjene dominantnosti od strane bliskih
osoba. Iako su obje verzije IAT-a imale zadovoljavajuću pouzdanost, IAT “dominacija-suradnja” pokazao se valjanijom mjerom implicitnog motiva za moći. Za razliku od IAT-a “moć-nemoć” koji nije značajno korelirao ni s jednom od korištenih mjera, IAT “dominacija-suradnja” je imao značajne i umjereno visoke korelacije sa samoprocjenama
i procjenama dominantnosti te obje mjere intrinzične motivacije.The aim of the study was to compare the validity of two versions of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) for implicit power motive measurement. In the first IAT version we used natural antonyms “power” and “non-Power” and in the second IAT more equally
desirable categories “dominance” and “cooperation”. The study was conducted on a sample of psychology students (N=73). In addition to the data on two IATs, we collected self-ratings on an explicit measure of power motive, two measures of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and peer-ratings of dominance. Though both IAT versions
showed satisfactory reliability, the IAT “dominance-cooperation” seemed as a more valid measure of implicit power motive. Compared to the IAT “power-nonPower” which had no significant correlations with the other measures used, the IAT “dominance-cooperation” had significant and moderately high correlations with both the
self-ratings and the ratings of dominance and the two measures of intrinsic motivation
