Explicit and Implicit Measures of Black Cat Bias in Cat and Dog People

Abstract

Two studies looked at the prevalence and predictors of black cat bias—negative behaviors and attitudes toward black cats—using explicit and implicit measures. The first study looked at an internet sample of 114 people to see if people who self-identified as liking cats (cat people) showed less bias against black cats than those who self-identified as dog people or those who liked both dogs and cats (dog-and-cat people). Participants completed a questionnaire that measured superstitious beliefs, belief in witchcraft, and religiosity before rating pictures and, for about half of the participants, descriptions of black and non-black cats. They rated each cat for how good they thought it was and whether they wanted to live with the cat. Participants also completed a brief implicit association task in which they categorized pictures of black and non-black cats and good and bad words. Results suggest that bias against black cats exists when measured implicitly for dog people and dog-and-cat people but not for cat people. These results suggest that liking cats does not protect one from black cat bias and that liking dogs may lead to black cat bias. Belief in witchcraft was positively correlated with the explicit measure of black cat bias for dog people (medium effect size). In study two, a sample of 37 college students, mostly self-identified as dog people, completed this study twice—once at least six weeks before and once no more than three weeks before Halloween. The implicit measure of black cat bias was about 40% larger when measured closer to Halloween. These results suggest that black cat bias might be modified by environmental factors.

Keywords

• black cat bias
• implicit vs. explicit measures
• cat vs. dog people