Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-qdpjg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T13:18:25.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - Automaticity and Implicit Measures

from Part III - Deep Dives on Methods and Tools for Testing Your Question of Interest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2024

By
Bertram Gawronski
Edited by
Harry T. Reis ,
Tessa West  and
Charles M. Judd
Harry T. Reis
Affiliation:
University of Rochester, New York
Tessa West
Affiliation:
New York University
Charles M. Judd
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder
Get access

Summary

Various areas in psychology are interested in whether specific processes underlying judgments and behavior operate in an automatic or nonautomatic fashion. In social psychology, valuable insights can be gained from evidence on whether and how judgments and behavior under suboptimal processing conditions differ from judgments and behavior under optimal processing conditions. In personality psychology, valuable insights can be gained from individual differences in behavioral tendencies under optimal and suboptimal processing conditions. The current chapter provides a method-focused overview of different features of automaticity (e.g., unintentionality, efficiency, uncontrollability, unconsciousness), how these features can be studied empirically, and pragmatic issues in research on automaticity. Expanding on this overview, the chapter describes the procedures of extant implicit measures and the value of implicit measures for studying automatic processes in judgments and behavior. The chapter concludes with a discussion of pragmatic issues in research using implicit measures.

Keywords

automaticitycognitive controlcognitive resourcesconsciousnessimplicit measuresintentionalitymeasurement
Type
Chapter
Information
Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology , pp. 404 - 426
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Asendorpf, J. B., Banse, R., and Mücke, D. (2002). Double dissociation between explicit and implicit personality self-concept: The case of shy behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 380–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banaji, M. R., and Hardin, C. D. (1996). Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7, 136–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banse, R., Gawronski, B., Rebetez, C., Gutt, H., and Morton, J. B. (2010). The development of spontaneous gender stereotyping in childhood: Relations to stereotype knowledge and stereotype flexibility. Developmental Science, 13, 298–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bar-Anan, Y., and Nosek, B. A. (2012). Reporting intentional rating of the primes predicts priming effects in the affective misattribution procedure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1194–1208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bar-Anan, Y., Nosek, B. A., and Vianello, M. (2009). The sorting paired features task: A measure of association strengths. Experimental Psychology, 56, 329–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bargh, J. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In Wyer, R. S. and Srull, T. K. (eds.) Handbook of Social Cognition. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., Chaiken, S., Raymond, P., and Hymes, C. (1996). The automatic evaluation effect: Unconditional automatic activation with a pronunciation task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 104–128.Google Scholar
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Stewart, I., and Boles, S. (2010). A sketch of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model. Psychological Record, 60, 527–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, I. V., Ma, J., and Lenton, A. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 828–841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bluemke, M., and Friese, M. (2006). Do irrelevant features of stimuli influence IAT effects? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brendl, C. M., Markman, A. B., and Messner, C. (2005). Indirectly measuring evaluations of several attitude objects in relation to a neutral reference point. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 346–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calanchini, J. (2020). How multinomial processing trees have advanced, and can continue to advance, research using implicit measures. Social Cognition, 38, s165–s186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, C. D., Brown-Iannuzzi, J., and Payne, B. K. (2012). Sequential priming measures of implicit social cognition: A meta-analysis of associations with behaviors and explicit attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 330–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, M., and Bargh, J. A. (1999). Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrey, F. R., Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., Hugenberg, K., and Groom, C. (2005). Separating multiple processes in implicit social cognition: The quad-model of implicit task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 469–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corneille, O., and Hütter, M. (2020). Implicit? What do you mean? A comprehensive review of the delusive implicitness construct in attitude research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24, 212–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correll, J., Park, B., Judd, C. M., and Wittenbrink, B. (2002). The police officer’s dilemma: Using ethnicity to disambiguate threatening individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1314–1329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Houwer, J. (2003a). The extrinsic affective Simon task. Experimental Psychology, 50, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Houwer, J. (2003b). A structural analysis of indirect measures of attitudes. In Musch, J. and Klauer, K. C. (eds.) The Psychology of Evaluation: Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
De Houwer, J., and De Bruycker, E. (2007). The identification-EAST as a valid measure of implicit attitudes toward alcohol-related stimuli. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 38, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Houwer, J., Heider, N., Spruyt, A., Roets, A., and Hughes, S. (2015). The relational responding task: Toward a new implicit measure of beliefs. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 319, Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Houwer, J., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Spruyt, A., and Moors, A. (2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, R., and Gawronski, B. (2009). When the method makes a difference: Antagonistic effects on “automatic evaluations” as a function of task characteristics of the measure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhar, R., and Gorlin, M. (2013). A dual-system framework to understand preference construction processes in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, 528–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., and Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eder, A. B., and Rothermund, K. (2008). When do motor behaviors (mis)match affective stimuli? An evaluative coding view of approach and avoidance reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 262–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength. Social Cognition, 25, 603–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., and Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013–1027.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B. (2013). What should we expect from a dual-process theory of preference construction in choice? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, 556–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B. (2019). Six lessons for a cogent science of implicit bias and its criticism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 574–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B., Balas, R., and Creighton, L. A. (2014). Can the formation of conditioned attitudes be intentionally controlled? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 419–432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B., and Bodenhausen, G. V. (2005). Accessibility effects on implicit social cognition: The role of knowledge activation versus retrieval experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 672–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., and Bodenhausen, G. V. (2012). Self-insight from a dual-process perspective. In Vazire, S. and Wilson, T. D. (eds.) Handbook of Self-Knowledge. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., and Creighton, L. A. (2013). Dual-process theories. In Carlston, D. E. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., De Houwer, J., and Sherman, J. W. (2020). Twenty-five years of research using implicit measures. Social Cognition, 38, s1–s25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., Deutsch, R., and Banse, R. (2011). Response interference tasks as indirect measures of automatic associations. In Klauer, K. C., Voss, A., and Stahl, C. (eds.) Cognitive Methods in Social Psychology. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., Deutsch, R., LeBel, E. P., and Peters, K. R. (2008). Response interference as a mechanism underlying implicit measures: Some traps and gaps in the assessment of mental associations with experimental paradigms. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., Geschke, D., and Banse, R. (2003). Implicit bias in impression formation: Associations influence the construal of individuating information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 573–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawronski, B., Luke, D. M., and Creighton, L. A. (in press). Dual-process theories. In Carlston, D. E., Johnson, K., and Hugenberg, K. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., Morrison, M., Phills, C. E., and Galdi, S. (2017). Temporal stability of implicit and explicit measures: A longitudinal analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 300–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. T., Pelham, B. W., and Krull, D. S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. M., and Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. Wiley.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A G., and Lai, C. K. (2020). Implicit social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 71, 419–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., and Schwartz, J. K. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., and Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E., and Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the implicit association test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A., Judd, C. M., Hirsh, H. K., and Blair, I. V. (2014). Awareness of implicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1369–1392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hermans, D., De Houwer, J., and Eelen, P. (2001). A time course analysis of the affective priming effect. Cognition and Emotion, 15, 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., and Roefs, A. (2009). Three ways to resist temptation: The independent contributions of executive attention, inhibitory control, and affect regulation to the impulse control of eating behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 431–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Högden, F., Hütter, M., and Unkelbach, C. (2018). Does evaluative conditioning depend on awareness? Evidence from a continuous flash suppression paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44, 1641–1657.Google ScholarPubMed
Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., and De Houwer, J. (2011). The dominance of associative theorising in implicit attitude research: Propositional and behavioral alternatives. Psychological Record, 61, 465–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Bernhardt., J., Dierksmeier, A., and Banse, R. (2011). An inkblot for sexual preference: A semantic variant of the affect misattribution procedure. Cognition and Emotion, 25, 676–690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inzlicht, M., Schmeichel, B. J., and Macrae, C. N. (2014). Why self-control seems (but may not be) limited. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 127–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process-dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 513–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpinski, A., and Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klauer, K. C., and Becker, M. (in press). Latent state–trait analyses for process models of implicit measures. In Krosnick, J. A., Stark, T. H., and Scott, A. L. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Implicit Bias and Racism. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klauer, K. C., and Teige-Mocigemba, S. (2007). Controllability and resource dependence in automatic evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 648–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koppehele-Gossel, J., Hoffmann, L., Banse, R., and Gawronski, B. (2020). Evaluative priming as an implicit measure of evaluation: An examination of outlier-treatments for evaluative priming scores. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 87, 103905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieglmeyer, R., and Deutsch, R. (2010). Comparing measures of approach-avoidance behavior: The manikin task vs. two versions of the joystick task. Cognition and Emotion, 24, 810–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieglmeyer, R. and Sherman, J. W. (2012). Disentangling stereotype activation and stereotype application in the stereotype misperception task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 205–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurdi, B., Seitchik, A. E., Axt, J. R., Carroll, T. J., Karapetyan, A., Kaushik, N., Tomezsko, D., Greenwald, A. G., and Banaji, M. R. (2019). Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 74, 569–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moors, A., and De Houwer, J. (2006). Automaticity: A conceptual and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosek, B. A., and Banaji, M. R. (2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., and Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 166–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oswald, F. L., Mitchell, G., Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., and Tetlock, P. E. (2013). Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: A meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 171–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K. (2001). Prejudice and perception: The role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K., Brown-Iannuzzi, J., Burkley, M., Arbuckle, N. L., Cooley, E., Cameron, C. D., and Lundberg, K .B. (2013). Intention invention and the affect misattribution procedure: Reply to Bar-Anan and Nosek (2012). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 375–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K., Burkley, M., and Stokes, M. B. (2008). Why do implicit and explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 16–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K., Cheng, S. M., Govorun, O., and Stewart, B. D. (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, B. K., and Correll, J. (2020). Race, weapons, and the perception of threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penke, L., Eichstaedt, J., and Asendorpf, J. B. (2006). Single attribute implicit association tests (SA-IAT) for the assessment of unipolar constructs: The case of sociosexuality. Experimental Psychology, 53, 283–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, K. R., and Gawronski, B. (2011). Mutual influences between the implicit and explicit self-concepts: The role of memory activation and motivated reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 436–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Röhner, J., Schröder-Abé, M., and Schütz, A. (2013). What do fakers actually do to fake the IAT? An investigation of faking strategies under different faking conditions. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 330–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothermund, K., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Gast, A., and Wentura, D. (2009). Minimizing the influence of recoding in the IAT: The recoding-free implicit association test (IAT-RF). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 84–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sava, F. A., Maricutoiu, L. P., Rusu, S., Macsinga, I., Virga, D., Cheng, C. M., and Payne, B. K. (2012). An inkblot for the implicit assessment of personality: The semantic misattribution procedure. European Journal of Personality, 26, 613–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, L. D., and Lambert, A. J. (2009). Contrast effects in priming paradigms: Implications for theory and research on implicit attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 383–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schnabel, K., Banse, R., and Asendorpf, J. B. (2006). Employing automatic approach and avoidance tendencies for the assessment of implicit personality self-concept: The implicit association procedure (IAP). Experimental Psychology, 53, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanks, D. R., and St. John, M. F. (1994). Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 367–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. W., Klauer, K. C., and Allen, T. J. (2010). Mathematical modeling of implicit social cognition: The machine in the ghost. In Gawronski, B. and Payne, B. K. (eds.) Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Solarz, A. K. (1960). Latency of instrumental responses as a function of compatibility with the meaning of eliciting verbal signs. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 239–245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spruyt, A., Hermans, D., De Houwer, J., Vandekerckhove, J., and Eelen, P. (2007). On the predictive validity of indirect attitude measures: Prediction of consumer choice behavior on the basis of affective priming in the picture–picture naming task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 599–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sriram, N., and Greenwald, A. G. (2009). The brief implicit association test. Experimental Psychology, 56, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stahl, C., Haaf, J., and Corneille, O. (2016). Subliminal evaluative conditioning? Above-chance CS identification may be necessary and insufficient for attitude learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 1107–1131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teige, S., Schnabel, K., Banse, R., and Asendorpf, J. B. (2004). Assessment of multiple implicit self-concept dimensions using the extrinsic affective Simon task. European Journal of Personality, 18, 495–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teige-Mocigemba, S., Klauer, K. C., and Rothermund, K. (2008). Minimizing method-specific variance in the IAT: The single block IAT. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teige-Mocigemba, S., Klauer, K. C., and Sherman, J. W. (2010). A practical guide to the implicit association test and related tasks. In Gawronski, B. and Payne, B. K. (eds.) Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Teige-Mocigemba, S., Penzl, B., Becker, M., Henn, L., and Klauer, K. C. (2016). Controlling the “uncontrollable”: Faking effects on the affect misattribution procedure. Cognition and Emotion, 30, 1470–1484.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uleman, J. S., and Moskowitz, G. B. (1994). Unintended effects of goals on unintended inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 490–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wegener, D. T., and Petty, R. E. (1997). The flexible correction model: The role of naive theories of bias in bias correction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 141–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, T. D., and Brekke, N. (1994). Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 117–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., and Park, B. (1997). Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and its relationships with questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 262–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolsiefer, K., Westfall, J., and Judd, C. M. (2017). Modeling stimulus variation in three common implicit attitude tasks. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 1193–1209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ye, Y., and Gawronski, B. (2018). Validating the semantic misattribution procedure as an implicit measure of gender stereotyping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 348–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Coull, A., and Rocher, S. J. (1999). Fencing off the deviant: The role of cognitive resources in the maintenance of stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×