Implicit stereotyping

Question 1

mindbugs

Answer 1

“…ingrained habits of thought that lead to errors in how we perceive, remember, reason and make decisions” (Banaji & Greenwald, 2013, p. 4)

We see this in the perceptual errors we often make (e.g., visual perception)

We mess up – cognitively – more often than we might like

But we are fundamentally GOOD people, right?

Question 2

how the IAT works

Answer 2

Your brain stores past experiences of stuff that goes together (e.g., valence)

It’s hard to set aside these associations. When valence is shared (lilac and happy = pleasant) we find the task easy

When it is not (lilac and ugly) it’s more tricky and we slow down (you can FEEL it!)

Question 3

IATs that followed

Answer 3

Some examples - age, race, gender/careers/educational attainment, weight

Question 4

reasons to be cautious

Answer 4

Old-fashioned self-report of overtly negative attitudes and the IAT results do not appear to tap same hostility

Initially, no one really knew for sure if those who scored high on IAT were those most likely to engage in racially discriminatory behaviour, but…

Question 5

what we now know

Answer 5

75% of those who take Race IAT reveal automatic white preference

It has been shown to predict some forms of discriminatory behaviour

Question 6

do mere associations show up in behaviour? - McConnell and Leibold (2001)

Answer 6

ps videotaped interviewed by either black or white woman (after ps completed race IAT)

Did IAT results predict behaviour toward white interviewer?

Tapes analysed for signs of COMFORT or FRIENDLINESS: smiling, speaking at greater length, laughing, making spontaneous social comments

And also for signs of DISCOMFORT or UNFRIENDLINESS: speech errors, hesitations, seating distance;

Interviewers also provided rating of ps on these

Question 7

McConnell and Leibold results

Answer 7

Ps with higher level of automatic White preference on race IAT showed less comfort and friendliness when talking with black than white interviewer

Question 8

more evidence 1

Answer 8

Race IAT result predicted:

• In simulated hiring decision, judging White job applicants more favourably than equally qualified Black applicants (Ziegert and Hanges, 2005)
• ER doctors recommending optimal treatment – thrombolytic therapy – less often for Black than White patient presenting with same acute cardiac symptoms (Green et al., 2007)
• College students being more ready to perceive anger in Black than in White faces (Hugenberg and Bodenhausen, 2003)

Question 9

more evidence 2

Answer 9

Greenwald et al. (2009) - large meta-analysis (184 studies) – Race IAT clearly predicts racially discriminatory behaviour

And since then…other examples: voting for John McCain rather than Barack Obama**; laughing at anti-black racial humour

But how strong is association? Correlation was 0.24 – medium – explain

But Banaji & Greenwald say – not overt discrimination, so correct answer is IAT does not strictly = prejudice

Question 10

ways of outsmarting the implicit mindbug

Answer 10

Virtuoso = male: Blind auditions for orchestra applicants (over 20 years proportion of women hired increased from 20-40%)

Academic work: blind marking but…not always possible to do things without knowing other’s identity

We see some of the other methods in the lecture on controlling stereotypes