In an effort to remove a presumed confound of extrapersonal associations, Olson and Fazio (2004 ) introduced procedural modifications to attitude versions of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). We hypothesized that the procedural changes increased the likelihood that participants would explicitly evaluate the target concepts (e.g., rating Black and White faces as liked or disliked). Results of a mega-study covering 58 topics and six additional studies (Total N = 15,667) suggest that: (a) after personalizing, participants are more likely to explicitly evaluate target concepts instead of categorizing them according to the performance rules, (b) this effect appears to account for the personalized IAT’s enhanced correlations with self-report, (c) personalizing does not alter the relationship between the IAT and cultural knowledge, and (d) personalized and original procedures each capture unique attitude variation. These results provide an alternative interpretation of the impact of personalizing the IAT. Additional innovation may determine whether personalizing implicit cognition is viable.