Implicit bias predicts less willingness and less frequent adoption of Black children more than explicit bias

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Sarah Beth Bell ◽  
Rachel Farr ◽  
Eugene Ofosu ◽  
Eric Hehman ◽  
C. Nathan DeWall
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Black Children ◽  
Explicit Bias

scholarly journals Historical roots of implicit bias in slavery

2019 ◽  
pp. 201818816 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Keith Payne ◽  
Heidi A. Vuletich ◽  
Jazmin L. Brown-Iannuzzi
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Racial Bias ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Implicit Racial Bias ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Black Residents ◽  
Structural Inequalities

Implicit racial bias remains widespread, even among individuals who explicitly reject prejudice. One reason for the persistence of implicit bias may be that it is maintained through structural and historical inequalities that change slowly. We investigated the historical persistence of implicit bias by comparing modern implicit bias with the proportion of the population enslaved in those counties in 1860. Counties and states more dependent on slavery before the Civil War displayed higher levels of pro-White implicit bias today among White residents and less pro-White bias among Black residents. These associations remained significant after controlling for explicit bias. The association between slave populations and implicit bias was partially explained by measures of structural inequalities. Our results support an interpretation of implicit bias as the cognitive residue of past and present structural inequalities.

Does Shared Gender Group Membership Mitigate the Effect of Implicit Bias Attributions on Accountability for Gender-Based Discrimination?

2020 ◽  
pp. 014616722096530
Author(s):  
Natalie M. Daumeyer ◽  
Ivuoma N. Onyeador ◽  
Jennifer A. Richeson
Keyword(s):  
Gender Discrimination ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Gender Group ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Gender Based

Attributing gender discrimination to implicit bias has become increasingly common. However, research suggests that when discrimination is attributed to implicit rather than explicit bias, the perpetrators are held less accountable and deemed less worthy of punishment. The present work examines (a) whether this effect replicates in the domain of gender discrimination, and (b) whether sharing a group membership with the victim moderates the effect. Four studies revealed that both men and women hold perpetrators of gender discrimination less accountable if their behavior is attributed to implicit rather than explicit bias. Moreover, women held male (Studies 1–3), but not female (Study 4), perpetrators of gender discrimination more accountable than did men. Together, these findings suggest that while shared gender group membership may inform judgments of accountability for gender discrimination, it does not weaken the tendency to hold perpetrators less accountable for discrimination attributed to implicit, compared with explicit, bias.

scholarly journals Facing One’s Implicit Biases: From Awareness to Acknowledgment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Hahn ◽  
Bertram Gawronski
Keyword(s):  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Affective Reactions ◽  
Implicit Biases ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

Expanding on conflicting theoretical conceptualizations of implicit bias, six studies tested the effectiveness of different procedures to increase acknowledgment of harboring biases against minorities. Participants who predicted their responses towards pictures of various minority groups on future IATs showed increased alignment between implicit and explicit preferences (Studies 1-3), greater levels of explicit bias (Studies 1-3), and increased self-reported acknowledgment of being racially biased (Studies 4-6). In all studies, effects of IAT score prediction on acknowledgment were significant even when participants did not actually complete IATs. Effects of predicting IAT scores were moderated by non-prejudicial goals, in that IAT score prediction increased acknowledgment of bias for participants with strong non-prejudicial goals, but not for participants with weak non-prejudicial goals (Study 4). Mere completion of IATs and feedback on IAT performance had inconsistent effects across studies and criterion measures. Instructions to attend to one’s spontaneous affective reactions toward minority group members increased acknowledgment of bias to the same extent as IAT score prediction (Study 6). The findings are consistent with conceptualizations suggesting that (1) implicit evaluations are consciously experienced as spontaneous affective reactions and (2) directing people’s attention to their spontaneous affective reactions can increase acknowledgment of bias. Implications for theoretical conceptualizations of implicit bias and interventions that aim to reduce discrimination via increased acknowledgment of bias are discussed.

Consequences of Attributing Discrimination to Implicit vs. Explicit Bias

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie M Daumeyer ◽  
Ivuoma Ngozi Onyeador ◽  
Xanni Brown ◽  
Jennifer Richeson
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Explicit Attitudes ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Police Shootings ◽  
Level Of Concern

Implicit bias has garnered considerable public attention, with a number of behaviors (e.g., police shootings) attributed to it. Here, we present the results of 4 studies and an internal meta-analysis that examine how people reason about discrimination based on whether it was attributed to the implicit or explicit attitudes of the perpetrators. Participants’ perceptions of perpetrator accountability, support for punishment, level of concern about the bias, and support for various efforts to reduce it (e.g., education) were assessed. Taken together, the results suggest that perpetrators of discrimination are held less accountable and often seen as less worthy of punishment when their behavior is attributed to implicit rather than to explicit bias. Moreover, at least under some circumstances, people express less concern about, and are less likely to support efforts to combat, implicit compared with explicit bias. Implications for efforts to communicate the science of implicit bias without undermining accountability for the discrimination it engenders are discussed.

scholarly journals Alignment Between Antecedents and Interventions: The Critical Role of Implicit Bias

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 583-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen A. Tomlin ◽  
Jill C. Bradley-Geist
Keyword(s):  
Racial Bias ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Demographic Differences ◽  
Current Thinking ◽  
Explicit Bias

We applaud the authors for tackling the important issue of policing and race from the unique perspective of industrial–organizational (I-O) psychology. Here, we propose a framework by which to examine the authors’ recommended interventions along the same implicit–explicit dimension employed in the focal article's conceptualization of racial bias. Mirroring current thinking within the diversity literature, the focal article notes that racial bias is “often very subtle” (Ruggs et al., 2016, p. 531) and can include “unconscious and implicit” aspects (p. 531). Extending this notion of implicit versus explicit bias to interventions themselves, we advocate for increased attention toward more implicitly focused interventions, as opposed to some of the more explicitly focused interventions suggested in the focal article. We conceptualize explicitly focused interventions as those that deal directly and openly with race, diversity, or demographic differences. Below, we discuss three potential advantages of implicitly focused interventions.

The burden of inequity — and what schools can do about it

2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (5) ◽  
pp. 8-11
Author(s):  
Vernita Mayfield
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Black Students ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Black Children ◽  
Peer Observation ◽  
Disaggregate Data

Black students may have little choice in what social burdens they must bear, but educators have a choice in alleviating them. Schools with a genuine commitment for disrupting inequities find ways to lighten the unenviable burdens black students bear. The author recommends that schools disaggregate data by race, provide ongoing professional development on implicit bias, create a peer observation tool to gain feedback on equitable practices and beliefs, and remind black children frequently about who they can become.

scholarly journals Six Lessons for a Cogent Science of Implicit Bias and Its Criticism

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 574-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bertram Gawronski
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
Social Discrimination ◽  
Implicit Measurement ◽  
Implicit Biases ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Current Article ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Over Time

Skepticism about the explanatory value of implicit bias in understanding social discrimination has grown considerably. The current article argues that both the dominant narrative about implicit bias as well as extant criticism are based on a selective focus on particular findings that fails to consider the broader literature on attitudes and implicit measures. To provide a basis to move forward, the current article discusses six lessons for a cogent science of implicit bias: (a) There is no evidence that people are unaware of the mental contents underlying their implicit biases; (b) conceptual correspondence is essential for interpretations of dissociations between implicit and explicit bias; (c) there is no basis to expect strong unconditional relations between implicit bias and behavior; (d) implicit bias is less (not more) stable over time than explicit bias; (e) context matters fundamentally for the outcomes obtained with implicit-bias measures; and (f) implicit measurement scores do not provide process-pure reflections of bias. The six lessons provide guidance for research that aims to provide more compelling evidence for the properties of implicit bias. At the same time, they suggest that extant criticism does not justify the conclusion that implicit bias is irrelevant for the understanding of social discrimination.

scholarly journals Understanding Ethnic Identity in Africa: Evidence from the Implicit Association Test (IAT)

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 340-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Lowes ◽  
Nathan Nunn ◽  
James A. Robinson ◽  
Jonathan Weigel
Keyword(s):  
Ethnic Group ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
Implicit Association Test ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic Of Congo ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Association Test ◽  
Implicit Association ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
Show Evidence

We use a variant of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to examine individuals' implicit attitudes towards various ethnic groups. Using a population from the Democratic Republic of Congo, we find that the IAT measures show evidence of an implicit bias in favor of one's own ethnicity. Individuals have implicit views of their own ethnic group that are more positive than their implicit views of other ethnic groups. We find this implicit bias to be quantitatively smaller than the (explicit) bias one finds when using self-reported attitudes about different ethnic groups.

THE ACADEMIC SWOON OVER IMPLICIT RACIAL BIAS

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katheryn Russell-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Racial Bias ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Implicit Racial Bias ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Explicit Bias ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractIn recent years, there has been a surge of discussion, debate, and research on the topic of implicit bias. Implicit bias has become the go-to form of racial bias that many academics, practitioners, and policy makers have identified as important and timely to study (Eberhardt et al., 2004; Levinson and Smith, 2017). Interventions to address implicit racial bias in policing have been particularly popular (Fridell 2008). Arguably, combatting implicit racial bias presents itself as a tool for protecting civil rights. This essay examines the emergence of the implicit bias paradigm as a way to address racial bias in justice system outcomes. The first part provides an overview of implicit bias, including how it is defined, how it is measured, and how it impacts the justice system. The second part examines the term “implicit bias.” This section assesses implicit bias as a social problem and considers whether the label illuminates or obscures the reality of racial bias in the criminal justice system. The discussion considers whether “implicit bias” is viewed as a more appealing approach for dealing with racial bias because it does not assign racial blame. The third part considers the contours of the relationship between implicit bias and explicit bias. The discussion highlights the interconnectedness between the two forms of racial bias. Is the implicit bias approach a signal of racial retrenchment? The final section considers how elementary and secondary education could be used as a proactive strategy for addressing implicit racial bias.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document